We don't have any doubt about obligation of Islamists towards Palestinian issue, regardless of their intellectual classifications, whether they are in authority or opposition. However, a number of statements attributed to them during the last months- some of which are correct of course- caused some doubts about this obligation, without forgetting that there are some exaggerations and deformations hit some of these statements. This is because of stance of some national and leftist statements concern with deforming the Arabic Spring specially after its arriving in Syrian station in addition to the results of the elections in Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Kuwait which ensured that the majority of such powers would stay at the margin in any democratic arrangements whichever are in this country or that.  

The satire of "birth" by those who have no "garbanzo" in is a natural matter, specifically the justification does not seem to be difficult even if some of them go to the furthest radicalism, speaking about Zionist's standing behind the revolutions other than attributing them to a western conspiracy for fragmenting the Arab World (bringing back the theory of Creative Chaos) and accompanying talk about alliance between the Islamists and the United States. This is not less importance than the stance that the Islamists must take towards the Palestinian issue, then their necessary care of any statements that can be employed in the context of doubting their stances all over the Arab Spring.  

We understand to some degree or another the reality that the Islamic power does not prefer the irritation of the International Community that supports the Zionist entity while it seeks its way through the new stage. With our satisfaction that the stance of the West is against such change, but this is a thing and to fall into the trap of such problematic statements is another thing. 

We understand, for instance, that the Egyptian Islamists and Salafis (ancestral) will not speak about the termination of "Camp David Agreement". This is not because such a matter needs what is similar to internal Egyptian consensus, but also because of what will result thereof of international sensitivity.     

We of course remember that Hosni Mubarak's regime did not practically abide by "Camp David Agreement", but it provided security and political services to the enemy made it according to the statements of Benjamin Bin Alia'zir (the Israeli former Minister of Industry) as "Strategic treasure) for the enemy's state. 

However; any sensitivities whatever they are will not justify the exaggerations of some Islamists in concentrating on such case (the case of abiding by Camp David) other than hesitating in declaring the right of Egyptians in reconsidering any agreement that does not fulfill their national interests besides assuring the support of Palestinian people in their struggle for restoring their rights.

This is what concerns Egypt that inherited unjust convention with the enemy. However, the matter seems to be more asserted when it concerns other countries that are not connected with conventions with the enemy and have no convincing justification to any form of naturalization with the enemy. 

We say this starting from the faith that Palestine is the central case of the nation that should not be neglected whatever the matter is. We say this based on defending the Islamic case that should not be allowed to fall in the trap of contradiction between its talk in the opposition squares and its talk in the context of authority or context of participating in it. The most important is that to adhere by not making the Islamic power contradicts with the masses that support it.  

The wise people know that the masses do not offer anybody blank "checks" as that is the same as they offer their trust to address and practice, they pull it out in case of change, shifting or contradiction. The wise people also know that any case settles in the spirit of the Arab and Muslim Citizen such as the Palestinian issue that who seeks to gain the trust of masses should align to such case openly and clearly.  

What draws attention here is that masses of the Arabic Maghreb (Western Arab) seems to be more aligning to Palestine, its Quds and Aqsa and its struggling power of the Eastern Masses, with no change to the marvelous situations of the latter. Nevertheless, some sensitivities exemplified in employment of some regimes to this issue, may affect the stances of some to some extent or another. That who watches the reception enjoyed by Ismail Haniyah in Tunisia, and that who sees the Palestinian flags raised on Tunisia streets will understand this clearly.    

This is can be applied on Libyan revolutionaries who express its people. We much heard of them shouting for Palestine despite the help rendered to them by NATO and despite their understanding of collusion of the nook of NATO with the Zionist entity. We will not forget Morocco and Mauritania where Palestine presents strongly in the activities of the political powers in top of them is the Islamic power, the matter that reflects the satisfaction with its standing among the masses.     
What we would like to say is that the Islamists do not hesitate in demonstrating their alignment to Palestinian issue with the necessity to mention that a part of the responsibility in this matter will be held by Hamas Movement that should have stopped talking about the borders of the state of 1967 so that it does not justify for anybody to involve in similar talk, specifically a solution of such kind does not seem to be possible in the horizon. To give evidence to this, relinquishments largely surpassed this were not accepted by Zionists. Therefore, it does no worth experiencing an address that had been experienced by Fatah Movement before and its harvesting was a dry stalks.
Today the scene seems to be different. The United State is not in its previous power, the Europeans are blundering in the crisis of Euro and the World witnesses polar multiplicity. Therefore, there is no need for all these statements that sometimes come as unstudied reply to programmed questions directed by Zionist affiliates diplomats and journalists.  

It is enough to say that the West should ask about the application of the Zionist entity to the decisions of what is so-called the International Legitimacy before asking the Islamic powers about their stances. Anyhow, it will not apply them, considering that the relations of the countries are not compulsory. Any country can reject relation with another one for its private considerations besides assuring the priority of supporting the Palestinians by all available means. (Statements of Sheikh al-Ghanoushi) that ensuring the rejection of acknowledgment of the state of Zionist entity deserves appreciation). 
For the sake of dear motto to the heart of the nation, and for the sake of Palestine the focal point of the hearts of its natives, and for the sake of credibility of the Islamists, we hope the notable Islamists with their all intellectual classifications should revise their speech and statements about this file. At the same time in which we hope for Hamas to invest the new Arabic and International atmospheres to restore its original address, far from the tale of the state within the borders of 1967(it is mentioned for the Movement its declared and repeated insistence on rejecting the acknowledgment to the state of the Zionist state that cost and will cost it much distress and siege).    

It is enough for the Movement to say to those who ask about its stance that it is the Zionist entity that occupies the land. So it is the Zionist entity is to be asked about what is possible to be presented by it before asking supposed meaningless questions. Now it is not presenting except cantons state on what will be left by the Wall for the West Bank in addition to Gaza Sector (10% of historical Palestinian area) as asserted by Netanyahu through his paper that was carried by his envoy to negotiations of Amman, the advocate Isaac Molkhu.
We will not forget the rejection of Ehud Olmert to the tempted presentation of the Authority that revealed by the negotiation documents which included the relinquishment of the Refugees Case with relinquishments of most importance in Eastern Quds. Exchange of lands means the existence of big settlement blocks in Western Bank.  
We repeat it again that Palestine is the central issue of the nation. The Islamists will not gain the trust of people unless they renew their obligation towards it openly and clearly. According to the coming policies, they will remain subject to the limits of the political possibility. The latter will be improved through time whether in the International or Arabic context. Not a long time will pass until the all will become sure that the Palestinian issue will be the biggest beneficiary of the Arab Spring and the regional and International developments in the medium range even if it is marginalized to some extent and to the short range for many reasons the most important of which is the insistence of the Palestinian Authority leadership, the Liberation Organization and Fatah Movement on the negotiation program; rejecting the comprehensive uprising project against the occupation; the matter that the Palestinian people will not submit to, who will know how to flare their new Intifada that will inspire the atmospheres of the Arab Spring, cohere to its Arabic and Islamic space in a new route that will be able, by Allah's will, to end the Zionist scheme as a whole..

Yasser Al-Za'trah