Emirati Authorities Make Arab Cultural Figures Hostage to Israeli Mossad
The facts show the suspicious role of the UAE in turning Arab cultural elites hostage to the Israeli Mossad through the lure of the poisonous literary awards that were set up for these writers by Abu Dhabi.
In an article, Algerian writer and journalist Hamida Ayachi pointed out that the cultural awards and financial support offered by the UAE to cultural figures often function as methods to “corrupt, stifle, and control” the Arab intellect.
He mentioned that the UAE promptly intervened to quell the revolutions in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Syria, transforming some into protracted civil conflicts. This strategy enabled the UAE to undermine these revolutions internally by employing mercenary militias.
He highlighted that the UAE employed dissidents and fostered betrayals within regimes, aiming to globalize internal conflicts and gain temporary international legitimacy through alliances. However, this strategy, aligned with major powers’ interests, also involved using culture to control cultural elites. Arabic served as a facade to mask Abu Dhabi’s transition from tribal or emirate rule to corporate governance.
Ayashi stated that security advisors participated in the cultural and ideological discussions hosted by Abu Dhabi, which invited Arab elites under the auspices of its established institutions and research centers.
He elaborated by saying, “I received an invitation to join an Arab symposium hosted by the Emirates Center for Studies and Research in Abu Dhabi. The event attracted Arab intellectuals and thinkers, predominantly Egyptians. Notable attendees included the leftist scholar Rifaat Al-Saeed, renowned for his work ‘The Brotherhood in the Game of Politics,’ and other contributions to leftist political discourse. Also present were representatives from the Egyptian media, such as the younger brother of Hassan al-Banna, the Islamic thinker Gamal al-Banna, and journalist Salah Issa. Additionally, intellectuals and experts on political Islam groups from North Africa participated. Our group comprised no more than thirty individuals, and the focus of our closed-door discussions centered around the theme of religious extremism. It’s worth noting that an Emirati security advisor was among the attendees.”
He noted that the meeting, held at the so-called “operations room,” marked the beginning of efforts to distort popular revolutions into counter-revolution. These initiatives, utilizing tribal and sectarian conflicts, aimed to undermine nation-states and sow “creative chaos,” ultimately leading to planned country destruction outlined in the Sinai Strategic Strategy. This strategy also targeted the downfall of American conservatives and promoted interventionism, supported by figures like Bernard-Henri Lévy and Médecins Sans Frontières, and various other non-governmental organizations.
He continued: “At that symposium, there was a fierce discussion between independent intellectuals and those loyal to the ideology of counter-revolution. The latter used deceptive slogans such as ‘spreading democracy’ and ‘eliminating tyranny and dictators from the “old” Arab world,’ which obscured the true intentions. In reality, the symposium served as a facade for small countries engaged in a grand strategy to hinder the Arab world’s progress toward becoming politically, economically, and culturally independent. This independence would allow the Arab world to play a pivotal role in fostering freedom and diversity within a multipolar world, rather than being dominated by a one-dimensional polarity.”
Ayachi criticized the UAE for “utilizing its cultural and media establishments, where it has concentrated all its resources to exert influence over Arab elites, following investments made under the guise of modernization and progress.” This involved hosting festivals, attracting international speakers, artists, and sports personalities, as well as fostering connections with Western and European institutions, particularly those using the English and French languages, in the fields of services and communication.
He further commented, “Emirati authorities didn’t limit their influence to the Middle East; their ambitions reached beyond, targeting North African countries as well. They aimed to control their elites through strategies involving literary and scientific awards, cultural festivals, and invitations extended to prominent intellectuals from the East and the Maghreb, coupled with financial grants.” These cultural and financial incentives, predominantly, served to manipulate and subdue the Arab intellect. This containment strategy wasn’t confined to individuals; it systematically infiltrated the cultural, scientific, and educational institutions of these nations, affecting theaters, cinemas, museums, and universities alike.
Al-Ayashi noted how these elites stayed silent on the ongoing genocide by the Zionist entity against Palestinians in Gaza. He observed their acquiescence to the Emirati support for Israel and how even former political officials endorsed this. Arab governments and cultural/political elites joined this line, serving the UAE’s interests, a country he likened to a mouse trying to appear as a lion.
Ayachi concluded his article by suggesting that the UAE is exploiting the challenging circumstances faced by various countries like Egypt, as well as others experiencing economic difficulties. He argues that the UAE capitalizes on despair, particularly among elites who have become dependent on it. Abu Dhabi’s role, he asserts, is now unmistakably clear: it conducts a covert campaign against anyone opposing it or its allies, utilizing financial power and manipulation of political and cultural influences to sow chaos in countries with historical significance, all while pursuing its ambitious agenda.
