-
The Arab and Islamic Summit Play and the Empty Speech of Al-Jolani
How atrocious is the hypocrisy of the leaders of Arab and Islamic countries, and how shameful their silence is. For two years, the Gaza people have been being starved and besieged, and their children are being used as human shields by Hamas, while Iran employs them as fuel for its regional projects — which were behind the October 7 massacre, leading to what is happening to the Gaza people. Yet, none of the leaders dared to properly condemn this double crime. They did not move despite the massacres and assassinations targeting Hamas leaders in Tehran, Gaza, Lebanon, and Damascus, and they only resorted to hollow speeches and cheap diplomatic tricks.
But as soon as Israel bombed a modest building in one of Doha’s popular neighborhoods, the capital of Qatar, they quickly convened an urgent summit, exchanging fiery statements and empty threats, as if the only thing demanded was condemning Israel alone. The real truth is that the condemnation should be threefold: against Israel, which continues its policy of siege and killing; against Hamas, which sacrifices its people and pushes them into the jaws of death; and against Iran, which trades in the blood of Palestinians in its futile conflicts. Turkey’s role in dismantling any possibility of a ceasefire, and their presence at the summit and their loud, deceitful speeches of incitement, only remind us of the saying, “They kill the murdered one and walk in his funeral,” mourning the victim with tongues stained with blood.
The silence of Arab and Muslim leaders regarding Hamas and Iran is a crime no less serious than their incapacity or refusal to work toward stopping the war and imposing a ceasefire with Israel. In fact, it is a blatant conspiracy that makes them partners in Gaza’s slaughter and reveals that the Palestinian cause has become merely a bargaining chip, while the people alone pay the price of hypocrisy and betrayal.
As the late Muammar Gaddafi once said, “The turn is coming for all of you,” and you deserve it.
**Ahmed Al-Shar’ah’s speech at the Doha Summit** in the capital of Qatar, on September 15, 2025, which was promoted by Khadija Ben Ghauna at the request of the Qatar-based Al Jazeera channel's management—described by her as “a fifty-second speech taught in political science institutes”—was nothing but a reflection of media mercenarism, despite my appreciation for her professionalism. What was presented was nothing more than a fabricated media plot: a few empty, decorative phrases, more like an echo than a political speech.
However, what was left unsaid was much heavier than what was said. Reducing the speech to such a minimal extent cannot be justified, neither by time pressure nor by the urgency of the moment. The event that brought together presidents and leaders, the bombing of a neighborhood building, and the Palestinian issue itself all called for a speech that transcended the noise of superficial slogans. Instead, it only produced a few polished, vague phrases, leaving behind only a new political void.
What appeared to observers is that the course of the speech was written or excerpted—either with approval or, at least, with a strategic consensus by major powers so as not to disturb wider interests being managed behind the scenes. A diplomatic mission by Qatar was being carried out, alongside maneuvers to normalize regional relations quietly, with applause on tables that television cameras do not film. As for Al Shar’ah, his red lines were precisely defined: no oversteps that could provoke issues leading to scrutiny of his past or that of his ministers, and no formulations that stir Sunni popular enthusiasm in a way that threatens delicate regional balances.
The reduction was not merely a matter of incapacity or time discipline; it was a political tactic. There was a fear that a longer or more daring word might reveal a radical ideological approach based on avoiding recognition and distinction of others, turning the speech from a humanitarian demand into an ideological invitation that exploits people's suffering and shortens its lifespan in power. Therefore, the speech was cloaked in vague, polished formulations to prevent exposing the underlying positions that criminalize dialogue and justify violence.
The conclusion is harsh: what was presented to the public was a diplomatic theater covering deeper agendas. A word with such an empty space, in the context of this human danger, is read today not only as a sign of incapacity but also as political consensus that fabricates media solidarity while secretly maintaining strategic deals behind the curtain.
Dr. Mahmoud Abbas
