Latest news with #KhalidBinHamadAl-Malik
Memri
6 days ago
- Politics
- Memri
Editor Of Saudi Government Daily: Hizbullah Must Be Disarmed, Willingly Or By Force
In a recent article, Khalid Bin Hamad Al-Malik, editor of the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah, harshly criticizes the Hizbullah and Amal organizations for opposing Lebanon's decision to disarm Hizbullah, and argues that if this organization refuses to surrender its weapons willingly, it must be divested of them by force. Hizbullah, he says, has caused the death and wounding of thousands of Lebanese, as well as extensive destruction in the country, and has committed terror against civilians. Moreover, it serves a foreign (i.e., Iranian) agenda, and torpedoes every reform aimed at rebuilding Lebanon, wanting to keep it backward, unstable and under its control. Therefore, Al-Malik argues, allowing Hizbullah to continue its policies and retain its weapons, which are directed mainly against rivals at home, is "an unforgivable crime." Khaled Bin Hamad Al-Malik (Image: The following are translated excerpts from his article:[1] "Hizbullah Secretary-General Na'im Qassem admits that 5,000 Lebanese have been killed and 13,000 have been wounded, although he neglected to mention the considerable damage to property, the loss of [Hizbullah's former] leader and much of its weapons, the destruction throughout Lebanon, and Israel's occupation of five areas in the south. And the losses may be greater than Na'im Qassem announced. The Lebanese state was supposed to openly declare the actual scope of the losses, and Hizbullah was supposed to comply with the Lebanese consensus and surrender its arms to the military, thus ending [the situation] whereby it possesses weapons to intimidate the Lebanese and threaten their lives. "But Hizbullah refuses to disarm or to set out a timetable for disarmament. It continues to insist that the army is incapable of defending Lebanon against Israel's attacks, yet it retains its weapons without using them against Israel. [Instead], it tolerates the strikes of the Israeli army against its people and strongholds, and does not retaliate. "The Hizbullah and Amal representatives walked out of the cabinet meeting two days ago, headed by Lebanese President [Joseph] Aoun, when [they realized that] the intension was to set out a timetable requiring Hizbullah to surrender its arms by the end of the year. This proves that the [Shi'ite] Hizbullah–Amal axis has no intention of [complying with the demand] to confine the weapons to the state and disarm all the [Lebanese] organizations. [This axis means to] leave Lebanon occupied and at Israel's mercy, without security or stability. "Ahead of the cabinet meeting Hizbullah's secretary-general stressed that the weapons would not be handed over, and threatened that the war between Lebanon and Israel would turn into a war among Lebanese, i.e., between Hizbullah and the Lebanese. This means that he wants Lebanon to remain a backward state, with Israel, Hizbullah and Amal controlling of all its resources. More than that: one day before the cabinet meeting, Hizbullah organized protests against its disarmament, and threatened to organize another protest after the meeting, which forced the army and security forces to deploy in order to prevent clashes between citizens… "I ask: What did Hizbullah wish [to accomplish] by plotting against Lebanon's unity and dragging it into wars that destroyed it, ruined its economy and growth and left it without income from tourism?... [Another] question: Do the organization's leaders not know that, by plotting against Lebanon, they obstruct its recovery, deprive it of Gulf and international aid, and provide Israel with an excuse to continue attacking it and occupying territory in the south?... "I have [yet another] question: Who is responsible for the death of 5,000 Lebanese and the wounding of 13,000 others, if not Hizbullah? Who is responsible for terror against civilians, if not this organization? Who has thwarted Lebanon's development and spread anarchy within it? Is there anyone to blame, except for Hizbullah, which implements a foreign [i.e., Iranian] agenda and conspires against the state on foreign orders? "Finally, I ask: When will Hizbullah realize, after decades of foiling every attempt at reform… that its policy and its weapons, which are directed against the Lebanese, are an unforgivable crime, and that its [tendency to] embroil Lebanon in wars with Israel is the reason [this country] is weak, wretched and succumbs to Hizbullah's decisions to destroy it? "[I address] Na'im Qassem and his helpers in Hizbullah, as well as Nabih Berri and his helpers in the Amal movement – the two Shi'ite [forces] that destroyed and are still destroying Lebanon, toyed with the interests of the state and thwarted the repair of what they have ruined in the country. Remember that things have changed in Lebanon. The situation is not as it was in the past, and if you do not hand over your weapons willingly, you will be divested of them by force and coercion."
Memri
07-08-2025
- Politics
- Memri
Editor Of Saudi Daily Warns Hamas Not To Refuse To Disarm And Cede Power In Gaza
In an August 4, 2025 article in the Saudi government daily Al-Jazirah, the daily's editor-in-chief, Khalid Bin Hamad Al-Malik, slammed Hamas for refusing to disarm and cede power in Gaza Strip, as advocated in the concluding statement of the international conference for advancing the two-state solution, held in New York on July 28-30, 2025 under the sponsorship of Saudi Arabia and France.[1] Hamas's position, he wrote, may lead to losing an opportunity and stopping the current momentum in the world for recognizing a Palestinian state and implementing the two-state solution. He urges Hamas to act responsibly, cede power in the Strip to the Palestinian Authority, and prefer the establishment of a Palestinian state over endless bloodshed. Rejectionism, he warns, will only play into the hands of Israel and the U.S., which themselves reject the two-state solution, and will give them an excuse to stick to that position. Khalid Bin Hamad Al-Malik (Image: The following are translated excerpts from Al-Malik's article:[2] "The U.S. and Israel rejected the conference on the two-state solution and its resolutions, and Hamas responded to the conference by refusing to surrender its weapons… By taking this position, Hamas is making a historic mistake and missing [the chance] to leverage the world's recognition of a Palestinian state and the momentum that has revived the Palestinian cause. "Hamas knows that the events of October 7, 2023 harmed the Palestinian cause and the dream of establishing a Palestinian state more than they helped them. Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed, over 100,000 have been wounded, about 90 percent of the Gaza Strip is in ruins and Israel has occupied large parts of it. In addition, the powers supporting [Hamas], namely Iran and Hizbullah, have been weakened. Another outcome of the October 7 events is that the U.S. and Europe joined the war on Israel's side by [providing it with] the weapons that allowed it to eliminate Hamas's leaders one by one, as well as Hizbullah's leaders and Iran's. After Isael tightened the noose [around Gaza]… and took over all the [border] crossings in order to prevent entry and egress, Hamas was left with nothing to bargain with except for the [Israeli] hostages, which it [agrees to release only in exchange for] an end to the war, [a demand] that is rejected by Israel and the U.S. "While all the wars and bloody conflicts and the many sacrifices have failed to achieve much, there is still a glimmer of hope that the Palestinian issue can be resolved through peaceful means, by getting the Western states to recognize [a Palestinian state]… This initiative [is being promoted] by the [Saudi] kingdom along with France. They organized the conference on the two-state solution, after which, for the very first time in history, Western countries recognized [a Palestinian state] one after the other. In its resolutions this conference stated that Hamas must be disarmed and be excluded from the administration of the [Palestinian] state. "I hope that Hamas's leaders act reasonably and wisely and prefer the establishment of a Palestinian state over [their] wish [to see] the movement continue to fight, which does not serve the Palestinian cause. [I hope] they accept what the [participating] countries agreed on at the conference, and hand the management of the [Gaza] Strip over to a Palestinian element that will act properly by taking what can be taken instead of refusing it, so as to prevent bloodshed and bring peace and stability to all the Palestinians… "I warn Hamas not to refuse [the demands to] surrender its weapons, cede [power] in Gaza and not be part of the management of the [Palestinian] state. If it does [refuse], it will conform to the positions of the U.S. and Israel, who [likewise] oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state. It will torpedo the outcomes of the conference on the two-state solution, just like Washington and Tel Aviv did, and enable them to reject [the establishment of] a Palestinian state by citing the position of Hamas's leaders. "Hamas ceding power in Gaza to the Palestinian Authority until the arrangements for the establishment of a Palestinian state [are completed] – despite all the challenges [this poses] – is the preferred and best way to thwart any excuse and claim that Israel and the U.S. may hide behind in order to oppose the plan of the Palestinian state. We do not want Hamas to be the excuse for thwarting the [Saudi] kingdom's efforts to attain the Palestinians' rights… Hamas is [of course] entitled to demand guarantees that the conference's resolutions will indeed be implemented [as a condition for] doing what is required of it."
