interview-with-the-lebanese-writer-and-political-researcher-ali-mourad
10 Apr, 2021

Interview with the Lebanese writer and political researcher Ali Mourad

The International Movement to Boycott US Products (BUP) conducted an interview with the Lebanese writer and political researcher Ali Mourad, who monitors United States affairs and the US hegemony project over West Asia. Mourad has several articles and researches in this field, and he was closely monitoring the recent events in the United States prior to the presidential elections, during the Covid-19 pandemic and the protests against the racist behavior of the US police. He also has a permanent appearance on television in this regard.


  • Why did American incidents suddenly disappear after Trump's departure, did the White House administration change its behavior, ambitions and hostilities, or returned back to the previous rules of the game?


It is noticeable that the media coverage, the state of clamor surrounding the White House and the leaks decreased after the arrival of Joseph Biden to the White House, this is mainly due to the fact that the US media had a problem with Donald Trump, with whom the deep state in the US was in a war and conflict with. Today Biden represents the interests of this country, and therefore we notice how the American media returned to its usual guidelines of covering the White House and the US administration news. To that media, Trump was an anomaly and a contradiction to the rules of the game, especially to the traditional elites.

Whoever obtains the American media and the ability to spread the dominant propaganda, wages his war on Trump for mostly internal reasons, but in terms of foreign policy, there are many Trump decisions and steps that were backed and supported by them, such as the normalization deals and the trade war on China.  The problem for the American media was Trump's weakening of US's historic alliances.

  • If so, could you explain the old rules of the game and what it based on?


The old game rules for the Mainstream, were to maintain the United States’ historic alliances, especially with the Europeans to secure what they called "US national security interests." Trump directed blows to these alliances through "America first", a policy that the traditional mainstream saw as "America only". Therefore, when Biden won the elections, he announced that he will revive America's alliances weakened by Trump, and the Europeans specifically expressed their satisfaction with Trump's departure. As for the traditional American game mainstream, this issue is vital, especially today, in which the American empire has been weakened and retreated its ability to secure its interests due to its military defeats in Western Asia by the resistance strikes, the economic growth of China, and finally the Corona pandemic.

  • What is your estimation regarding the nature of US behavior during the Biden era: Will the economic wars and sanctions continue, and will the focus on China and Russia reduce other confrontations such as the the Middle East and the South America continent?


Biden will try to benefit from what Trump has brought about in the field of sanctions and economic wars, as a number of members in the Biden administration are admired by the trade war against China, and they want to benefit from the sanctions he imposed on Iran and Syria by obtaining political concessions from the two resisting countries. Of course there are those among the members of this administration who think that it is not necessary to go far by relying on unilateral sanctions as a main weapon against their opponents, because it may turn back on them and their dollar in the end with the increase of the punished and blockaded, where they may gather in a certain economic framework and overthrow the power of the dollar, and then the economic hegemony of the United States. It is true that Biden and his team believe in the necessity of turning east to confront China and Russia, but this doesn’t mean neglecting Western Asia, because in our region there are vibrant forces that can make a big difference within the confrontation of both China and Russia against the US strategy.

  • In your opinion, has the US sanctions brought results, or caused economic losses to the peoples without any political gain?


Through experience and evidence, the US sanctions against free countries have not succeeded, and the evidence is before us in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba as well as North Korea. Yes, the peoples who are affected, even the American citizens themselves admit that the sanctions did not succeed in overthrowing the regimes, but rather targeted the poorest peoples and groups. The truth is that the insistence on sanctions aims mainly to impoverish and humiliate the peoples in order to push them to retreat from supporting their political anti-USA regimes. Therefore, we find that the majority of the blockaded peoples today are the keenest and more adamant on their stances against US hegemony, and they will elect those who guarantee them a continuous confrontation with Washington whatever the consequences; it is a matter of dignity and a refusal to break their will and subjugate them.

  • How do you view the idea of boycott, can we face a huge economical empire as the United States? Or the issue does not go beyond a moral and humanitarian stance ... or do you have another opinions?


The idea of ​​boycott should be postulates, and before talking about its impact on the US economy, we should ask ourselves this question: Is it acceptable for us to buy and consume goods and products from our executioners, killer, and besiegers?  Of course not, so the approach to boycott must be in principle an ethical stance, and later we will discuss the economic impact that a single besieging country will not be able to achieve, but rather through solidarity and harmony among countries and peoples of different stripes, with a unified goal which is confronting the new colonialism. Of course, if there is a large bloc of nations, peoples and liberation movements with one unified stance to boycott US goods and products, there will be an impact and repercussions on the US economy, and therefore if the goal is to hurt the United States economically and drive them to adjust their policies for fear on their interests, the move should not be unilateral.

  • How do you view the US product, and are there real alternatives internationally and nationally? What is the best way to approach issues?


Of course, today we have reached a stage where we have alternatives to all the goods and commodities produced by the United States. Even in the field of technology that Washington has always tried to promote for its supremacy, but it has fallen with the rise of real competitors such as China.  Also, in terms of agricultural, industrial products and machinery, there is an alternative for every US product. Americans have relied on their media, Hollywood and propaganda to conquer the minds before the markets under the pretext that they are superior in everything and there are no alternatives for their product... This is a misleading.

 

  • We have started a campaign against “iPhones”. What do you think of the manufacturing company and the big aura about these phones?


The campaign to boycott the “iPhone” is appropriate, since the manufacturing company "Apple" is involved in the blood shed of our peoples through partnerships and contracts with the Israeli enemy. Competing companies have destroyed the image of the “iPhone” in the smartphone market, and there are competing phones with their quality and have proven that they outperform it in terms of specifications and are less expensive than it.  Therefore, there are factors that help the boycott of US products campaigns to succeed. Perhaps we lack more networking with other parties around the world to involve them in the boycott movement and expand participation, at that time, there will be better results that “Apple” can see when counting its sales around the world.