Druze spiritual leaders, movements, and forces in Syria, Lebanon, and occupied Palestine have directed sharp criticism at Sheikh Al-Aql of the Druze Unitarian community in Suwaida, Hikmat Al-Hijri, stressing that his recent statements in which he declared that “the Druze are an integral part of the State of Israel” are nothing but empty words, that “everything he said about the shared faith is pure nonsense,” and that “he has crossed all boundaries, and the Druze religious doctrine is innocent of him.”
While the Druze of Jaramana city in the Damascus countryside confirmed on Wednesday that Al-Hijri does not represent them, former Israeli Knesset member and writer Saeed Nafa’ described Al-Hijri’s statements as “mere scribbles,” and , “Perhaps some were deceived by him, but Al-Hijri ultimately had a relationship with Israel even since the days of the former Assad regime, and he knows perfectly well that he was a card in the hands of the Israelis and has been used up, and he is currently looking for a way to get down from the ladder he climbed.”
Jarmana disavows Al-Hijri
The Druze community in the city of Jaramana, near Damascus, announced their disavowal of al-Hijri and issued a statement, a copy of which was received , in which they said: “We, the people of the city of Jaramana, declare clearly and explicitly that Sheikh Hikmat al-Hijri does not represent us, nor does he represent the position of the city of Jaramana and its people. We also reject any positions, statements, or practices issued by him or by any party that adopts his positions.”
The statement affirmed that “Jaramana was and will remain Damascus as its destination, and an integral part of the Syrian national fabric, and that its connection to Damascus is not an emergency position or a product of a particular stage, but rather an extension of a deep-rooted historical and national relationship, embodied by the people of Jaramana throughout their history through their standing alongside Damascus and its people in various stages, and their participation in its national positions in the face of injustice, tyranny and dictatorship.”
The statement asserted that this approach has been consistently affirmed by the religious authority in its positions since the liberation of Syria, through its emphasis on the unity of the Syrian people and society, its rejection of division and discord, and its commitment to preserving the unity of the nation and the safety of its citizens. It continued: “We reject the use of the name of Jaramana or its people in any political or security project or discourse that does not reflect their will, and we affirm our commitment to the city’s security and stability and its natural relationship with Damascus and all other Syrian cities.”
The statement said that the people of Jaramana affirm their respect for all the people of Syria, regardless of their affiliations, and reject sedition, division and violence, and are keen to ensure that the decision of their city remains emanating from its people, far from any guardianship or subordination.
The Presidency regrets
Officially, the Syrian Presidential Advisor for Media Affairs, Ahmed Muwaffaq Zaidan, expressed his regret over what Al-Hijri had said, while Damascus was celebrating the completion of the merger between the “Syrian Democratic Forces - SDF” and the self-administration of the northeastern regions of Syria, on the one hand, and the Syrian government on the other.
In a statement said: “It is unfortunate that while the SDF is joining the Syrian state and realizing that Syria can only be one united country, we find parties trying to join the Israeli enemy,” expressing his belief that what Al-Hijri announced “does not represent our people in Suwaida, nor does it represent our Druze people.”
He said: “We know perfectly well that there are problems within Suwaida, but we know that there are those among them who do not agree with al-Hijri. Suwaida is the heart of Suwaida, and it contains national elements, figures, and personalities, and al-Hijri’s position does not represent our people in Suwaida.”
The Syrian presidential advisor appealed to “all parties to prioritize reason and to realize that what happened in Damascus with the integration of the SDF forces should be a message to everyone that the era before December 8 is not the same as after it. Today, Syria is part of the international community, and this entire community, from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, and others, invests in, loves, and joins Syria, while there are elements that are trying to sabotage or drag Syria back to the era before December 8,” in reference to the day of the fall of the Assad regime at the end of 2024.
For his part, Laith Al-Balous, a member of the Syrian People’s Assembly representing Suwaida, affirmed that “certificates of belonging to the homeland are not sold in the bazaars of internationalization, and the ancient history of Suwaida is too great and pure to be summarized in a cheap statement linking it to the usurping occupying entity.”
In a post on his Facebook page, Al-Balous said: “We stand with the homeland, Syria, its land, people, and identity. The towering Mount Hermon, which connects us to our occupied Golan, reminds us every moment that our dignity is derived from the dignity of Damascus, and not from fleeting and suspicious promises that seek to fragment what the enemies have failed to divide for decades.”
Al-Balous called on the sheikhs, dignitaries, and civil society figures in Suwaida to “take a firm and clear public stance regarding these disastrous statements that are dragging the governorate into undesirable consequences and endangering civil peace and the national fabric,” stressing that “silence here is no longer neutrality but rather complicity, and you must clear yourselves of this national downfall, otherwise your silence and inaction will make you direct partners of this traitorous madman in his dirty destructive project, like his supporters, operators, and those in charge of it.”
Druze of Lebanon
The response to al-Hijri’s positions was not limited to members of his sect within the country, but extended to the Druze in the region. The Druze Unitarian Council in Lebanon issued a statement in which it considered that “it is absolutely unacceptable to place the Druze Unitarians in an artificial partnership with the State of Israel, and to say that they are an integral part of this state, and that they share with it the doctrine, and are concerned with preserving it.”
The Druze religious leadership in Lebanon said, through a statement published on its official website, that “it is not wise at all to deliberately deviate and escalate in wounding the Druze conscience and attacking the established monotheistic Islamic identity, and to overturn the authentic Arab Druze history and heritage, the truth of which our blessed ancestors proved, and the truth of which is that we are an integral part of our Arab Islamic environment.”
The statement stressed that “we belong by blood and faith to the Islamic monotheistic Doha, and that we are the first defenders of our homelands, and believers in the national spiritual partnership that is embodied in a strong, nurturing state, protected by its sons, so that it is the protector of them all and the protective umbrella for their existence.”
The Druze religious leadership affirmed that “Hijri’s words, whatever his motives, do not reflect the reality of the Druze monotheists, and come outside the honorable historical context of the Druze community.” It called on “the sheikhs and officials in the community and in Jabal al-Arab to educate their children to be wary of such extremist and harmful positions,” urging “everyone to adhere to the constants of faith and history, and not to underestimate the seriousness of the matter.”
The spiritual leadership of the Druze of Lebanon said, “Suwaida is dear to us, and its wound still hurts us. We are still waiting for a fair reckoning and the imposition of penalties on the perpetrators, and for Suwaida to be given its due. But the blood of the innocent is not honored, and the honor of the people is not protected and preserved, except by reason and wise and courageous stances, not by revolutionary stances and throwing oneself into destruction.”
Hijri nonsense
From within Palestine 48, the “Progressive Movement for Communication – Darb al-Mu’allem” issued a statement denying what al-Hijri had said in his recent statements regarding the partnership in faith between the Druze and Israel.
The movement said that “Israel knows full well that everything that (Al-Hijri) said about the common faith is pure nonsense,” noting that “many Druze leaders, since the establishment of the state (Israel), have been promoting such ideas, and they were disappointed and let down after the state institutions threw them to their rightful place, and treated the Druze exactly like the rest of the Arabs, confiscating 70% of their lands and putting their livelihood in its hands; honorable people at the tables of the wicked.”
The movement considered that al-Hijri “can, in his fiefdom of Bashan, in his own name or in the name of his subjects therein, take the political position he wants, deal with whomever he wants, and serve whomever he wants, but he is the least of those who declare in the name of the Druze: ‘We, as Druze Unitarians,’ for he is neither in the position nor in the place that allows him to do so, and the Druze Unitarians, with their faith, are far removed from his thought.”
The movement’s statement was signed by its secretary, Imad Daghash, along with a number of its cadres, including Fawaz Sweid, Fawaz Hussein (Amer), Sami Muhanna, Salah Halabi, Khair Al-Din Abdullah, Yamen Zeidan, Imad Sarhan, Naffaa Naffaa, Khaled Khald, Imad Farrou, Waddah Al-Qasim, and Saeed Naffaa.
The statement called on “the religious leaders in Israel, the Golan Heights, the Damascus countryside, Wadi al-Taym, Jordan, and Lebanon, regardless of their political positions, to speak out, as they know full well that this statement is untrue and constitutes far-reaching harm to the Druze.” It also called on them to “put an end to this slide that is offensive to the Druze and the Druze faith, and we see no need to remind anyone of what is stated in the books of the Druze Unitarian doctrine about this alleged ‘partnership’ which is denied in its entirety.”
The statement stressed that “Israel sees the “Bashan feudalism” only as a bargaining chip in its interests in its Middle Eastern project, and will discard it at the first opportunity,” noting that “taking the residents of Suwaida, including the displaced and the students, as hostages to search for tattered lifelines after all the bets of the Hijri and his entourage have begun to crumble is a dangerous gamble that will only bring calamities.”
The statement issued on Wednesday also called on “the national, Arab, and Islamic forces in Syria, in all their locations and components, to take all the necessary steps towards the mountain to erase the effects of the events of July 25, in order to block the path of every gambler in the fate of Syria and its unity.”
Descending the ladder
In a statement to writer, legal advisor and former Israeli Knesset member Said Nafa’a considered everything Al-Hijri said in his statement to be “lies and contrary to the Druze faith.” He said: “I am one of the most knowledgeable about the details of the Druze faith, even more so than many of the Druze religious leaders, and what Al-Hijri announced has no relation to reality.” He pointed out that statements are expected to be issued by religious leaders, whether in the Syrian Golan or in Lebanon, as the brothers in the Golan have a clear position regarding the relationship with Israel.
Regarding the reason behind Al-Hijri’s recent statements, Nafa’ said, “He is a person who has had a relationship with Israel since the days of the former Assad regime, and I believe that he has become convinced of the bankruptcy of his project regarding what he was announcing about establishing a state and the right to self-determination. He knows perfectly well that he was a card in the hands of the Israelis and has been used up, and he is currently looking for a way to get down from the ladder he climbed up.”
Nafa’a stressed that everything Al-Hijri had previously demanded “was nothing but scribbles and some simple-minded people were deceived by it, and there was even a disagreement between him and Sheikh Al-Aql in Israel, Muwaffaq Tarif, but Al-Hijri listened more to those who work with the Israeli establishment from among the Druze, and these are nothing but pawns on the chessboard, moved by Israel according to its interests,” indicating that “Al-Hijri himself knew perfectly well that it was impossible to achieve what he promoted and what he dreamed of, or what some elements in the Israeli army made him dream of, and today he is looking for a way to get down from the ladder.”
Tags:
asiawest
