We met with him in Beirut. We had the opportunity to discuss various topics, ranging from the sectarian impasse to the current standing of the Axis of Resistance. However, due to time constraints imposed by his advisors, we were compelled to conclude the conversation just as it was deepening.<\/p>\n
Sheikh Maher possesses a lucid and direct style. In his view, the sectarian deadlock is a genuine impasse, and overcoming it seems nearly impossible in the foreseeable future. While acknowledging certain successes ranging from Leftists to Islamists, and extending to Shiite Iran, he believes that, in the aggregate, there has been a failure regarding the resistance and the Palestinian struggle.<\/p>\n
Regarding Tom Barrack\u2019s comments praising the Ottoman order, he asserts, “We must unite by our own volition, not under the American umbrella.” He praises the Ottomans, Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, and Gamal Abdel Nasser. An interesting perspective I encountered in Beirut is the critical view holding the late Ottoman administrators responsible for the region’s plight. According to Sheikh Maher, the rise of Turkish nationalism within the Ottoman Empire fragmented the\u00a0Ummah<\/em>\u00a0[the global Islamic community] and the Empire itself. I strongly disagree with this view, but I chose not to debate it to avoid digressing from the main topic.<\/p>\n Together with\u00a0Harici<\/em>\u00a0Editor-in-Chief Tun\u00e7 Akko\u00e7, we presented our questions:<\/p>\n Harici:<\/strong><\/p>\n Do you consider the probability of a potential Israeli attack to be high? What are your assessments and predictions regarding Lebanon\u2019s near future?<\/p>\n Sheikh Maher Hammoud:<\/strong><\/p>\n It is difficult to envision the near future due to the multitude of factors influencing the reality in Lebanon. Naturally, the most significant factor is the severe and heavy pressure exerted by the American administration on the Lebanese state and Lebanon in general. These pressures are potent enough to achieve a large portion of their objectives.<\/p>\n Secondly,\u00a0the government is feeble; primarily because it did not come to power through the will of the people, but rather through external decisions, specifically American ones.<\/strong><\/p>\n Thirdly,\u00a0the blows sustained by the resistance are not of a trivial nature.<\/strong>\u00a0The martyrdom of Sayyed Hassan [Nasrallah] and the targeting of the leadership cadre have altered the landscape.<\/p>\n Fourthly,\u00a0the immense technological advancement and Artificial Intelligence possessed by America and Israel<\/strong>\u00a0have rendered targets completely exposed. Individuals and locations can be pinpointed via voice signatures, telephones, or Wi-Fi.<\/p>\n Fifthly, there exists a faction in Lebanon that identifies with the American and Zionist stance. This faction represents the American or Zionist voice rather than the voice of Lebanon or Lebanese interests.<\/p>\n Sixthly,\u00a0the Arab world is in a state of regression.<\/strong>\u00a0For over a year and a half, no Arab reaction has emerged that is commensurate with the magnitude of the Israeli crimes committed in Gaza and Lebanon.<\/p>\n Seventhly,\u00a0Iran\u2019s situation is no longer what it used to be.<\/strong><\/p>\n These factors, among others, make the situation extremely difficult and force the region into a tunnel that is one hundred percent American-Zionist. However,\u00a0our experience<\/strong>\u2014the Israeli occupation 43 years ago, as well as the attempts by Israel and America to liquidate the resistance in 2006 and earlier\u2014leaves us a wide margin for optimism.<\/p>\n Certain variables may emerge. For instance, the recent potential for American-European discord over the Greenland issue, Trump\u2019s unpredictability and where it might lead, Netanyahu\u2019s fall in Israeli domestic politics, or uncalculated developments.<\/p>\n We maintain this: If the resistance so chooses, it can inflict genuine blows upon the Zionist entity even under current conditions. However, the problem lies in the reaction of the Zionist side. This reaction has transcended all logic, as evidenced by the destruction and genocide we see in Gaza and the South. This is a situation that was not previously accounted for.<\/p>\n There are genuine changes within the structure of the Zionist entity that we have not sensed before. The inclusion of Smotrich, Ben-Gvir [radical Zionist politicians], and their ilk in the government has removed many international legal and moral constraints.<\/p>\n For this reason, it is said that\u00a0the resistance is investing in the “Unseen” [al-Ghayb<\/em>]<\/strong>. This is not a pejorative accusation. It relies on the Unseen or potential shifts, and this is not a remote possibility.<\/p>\n On the other hand, there is a religious and metaphysical dimension. We are promised victory and the demise of Israel. In fact, this notion is more prevalent in Jewish culture than in Islamic culture. Review Jewish culture, including Zionism: they speak of Israel\u2019s demise more than we Muslims or Christians do. This is evident.<\/p>\n Harici:<\/strong><\/p>\n Returning to Lebanon; Tom Barrack\u2019s visit to Lebanon and his remarks here were widely debated. Do you agree with the assessment that “Lebanon is a failed state”?<\/p>\n Sheikh Maher Hammoud:<\/strong><\/p>\n Part of this statement is true, but other parts are false. For example,\u00a0his expression that Lebanon must be subservient to Syria is inaccurate.<\/strong><\/p>\n The best response to him was given by the Lebanese Minister of Culture, Ghassan Salam\u00e9. He is a figure of immense culture and consciousness, with leftist-nationalist roots. He told Tom Barrack: “Read history before you speak about Lebanon.”<\/p>\n Tom Barrack\u2019s knowledge of history is patently weak. He is a businessman, not an academic. As for his Lebanese origins; his father is Lebanese, he was born in America, and he does not speak Arabic. Perhaps he himself is a failure because he is of Lebanese origin.<\/p>\n Regarding the issue of the Lebanese state\u2019s failure, unfortunately, we cannot deny this.\u00a0Yes, Lebanon is a failed state, and throughout history, it has often been so.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why? There are many reasons for this. One is American interference, which sabotages every good initiative. Another is sectarian division. Furthermore, there is a fundamental question: Does Lebanon possess the necessary elements to truly be a state? Every state has urban and economic resources; the situation in Lebanon is different.<\/p>\n In any case, in our opinion, we have passed this stage. The Lebanese people, despite political divisions, want Lebanon as it is\u2014approximately 90 percent of them: with its sects, its map, and its problems.<\/p>\n “We want Lebanon, even in this state.”<\/strong><\/p>\n People prefer Lebanon in its current form over becoming countries like Syria or Egypt, which suffer from dictatorship, the absence of political life, and similar problems.<\/p>\n The truth is that Lebanon is a failed state; however,\u00a0when compared to Arab countries, it is undoubtedly better.<\/strong><\/p>\n Look, for example, at how the Saudi King or the Crown Prince treats parties and Sheikhs: Saudi Arabian prisons are full of Sheikhs. All of them are Salafists and are not against the regime; yet they were imprisoned simply for thinking contrary to the monolithic viewpoint. This is not possible in Lebanon.<\/p>\n What I say from the pulpit in Lebanon, you cannot say anywhere else in the Arab world. This is one of Lebanon\u2019s assets.<\/p>\n There are positive aspects in Lebanon. As the late former Prime Minister Salim al-Hoss said:<\/p>\n “In Lebanon, there is a lot of liberty, but little democracy.”<\/p>\n That is to say, freedom exists; but those who represent the people cannot come to power due to American interference and similar reasons.<\/strong><\/p>\n Lebanon remained without a president for two and a half years. How did the president eventually arrive? He arrived through an external American-Arab decision. Although he is a respectable person, one would have wished he had arrived through a Lebanese decision.<\/p>\n Today, it is a known fact:\u00a0The Prime Minister is also determined by a phone call from abroad.<\/strong><\/p>\n Therefore, Lebanon is a failed state; but compared to Arab countries, it is better.<\/p>\n Harici:<\/strong><\/p>\n As a cleric, do you have a clear view on how Lebanese society can overcome its sectarian social problem? Is there a solution compass you have formulated regarding this issue?<\/p>\n Sheikh Maher Hammoud:<\/strong><\/p>\n I have many ideas; but they are not applicable. Therefore, our stance is closer to philosophy in the Platonic sense. Unfortunately, it is theoretical, not practical.<\/p>\n The Lebanese issue, and the issues of the Islamic world in general, are not easy.\u00a0Looking at recent history, the Arab and Islamic world was once encompassed by leftist ideology, and it failed.<\/strong><\/p>\n Subsequently,\u00a0the wave of Political Islam arrived, and unfortunately, it too failed.<\/strong>\u00a0This wave emerged in a form not rooted in the origins of Islam, producing DAESH [ISIS], Al-Nusra, assassinations, and terror. At the same time, it produced “American Islam.” This is the Islam being presented today. This is incorrect and does not build a clear future.<\/p>\n We, as Islamists, presented an Islamic solution; but so far, it has failed. The leftist solution also brought nothing.<\/p>\n The Iranian model, on the other hand, has demonstrated brilliant success in the political and resistance spheres. Because in the history of the Ummah, there is no other example of a state on this scale where its slogans and practices overlap so perfectly.<\/strong><\/p>\n However, the problem is this: Iran has not been able to step outside the sectarian framework, and it will not be able to.<\/strong><\/p>\n Even if it tries to present Shiism to the Islamic world in a better way, it cannot succeed because it would lose its own base. The Shiite mass is not ready to give up even a single myth attributed to Shiism.<\/strong><\/p>\n Therefore, no matter how successful Iran is, it cannot be a general model for the Islamic world.<\/strong><\/p>\n Consequently, neither American Islam can take us forward, nor terror, nor the Iranian model, which is the most successful example politically.<\/strong>\u00a0Because the sectarian knot is much larger than we once thought.<\/p>\n We once thought it could be overcome or set aside; this is not possible.<\/strong><\/p>\n Why? Because the material used to mobilize the public is sectarian. You mobilized the Iranian people for the state using sectarian material; now you cannot tell them “drop this, we are coming with something else.” This is impossible.<\/strong><\/p>\n Likewise, the Islamic world will not accept this material because it rejects it on religious, historical, and other grounds.<\/p>\n The landscape is complex. I say this with my deep and unshakable commitment to Sunnism\u2014not in the details, but in the general framework\u2014and at the same time, with my deep conviction in Iran\u2019s success.<\/p>\n After 45 years of experience, I say this: We too have failed. When I say we failed, I mean we could not win over the people. The people gravitate towards sectarian insults, incitement, hollow slogans, money, and interests.<\/strong><\/p>\n The late Rafic Hariri, despite his many positive aspects, won people over with money. He did not have a political project; yet he captured the Lebanese scene with money.<\/p>\n Harici:<\/strong><\/p>\n Tom Barrack also spoke of federalism and stated that it has failed in the Middle East. At the same time, he implied that the region could unite under an imperial umbrella. These statements are being debated extensively in Turkey. What is your comment?<\/p>\n Sheikh Maher Hammoud:<\/strong><\/p>\n There is a very significant saying by Imam Ali addressed to the Kharijites. When they raised the slogan “Judgment belongs only to Allah,” he said:<\/p>\n “This is a word of truth, by which falsehood is intended.”<\/p>\n Throughout history, we were a single state under the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman caliphates, and this was good. The problem arose when the Ottoman Empire began to undergo Turkification. This was approximately in the early or mid-19th century.<\/p>\n During this period, consuls came to Lebanon, the\u00a0Mutasarrifate<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Kaymakamates<\/em>\u00a0were established. In Egypt, Muhammad Ali (Pasha) broke away from the Ottomans, and fragmentation began.<\/p>\n We were a single state throughout history; this is true. But not under an American decision.<\/p>\n We want this through an Islamic, or at least a nationalist, decision. The Ba’ath Party spoke of a single state. The Syrian Social Nationalists spoke of a single state. The Islamists spoke of a single state and the Caliphate.<\/p>\n Yes, this region must not be divided. There should be no borders between Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Palestine.<\/p>\n Who drew these borders? French and British colonialism; Sykes-Picot.<\/p>\n Tom Barrack criticized Sykes-Picot. We are also against it; but not from Barrack\u2019s perspective. We are against it from the perspective of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, Saladin Ayyubi, and Gamal Abdel Nasser.<\/strong><\/p>\n The goal is the unity of the Ummah under the umbrella of Islam, including not only Arabs but also Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and everyone else.<\/strong><\/p>\n This, as we said, is a Platonic dream. It is not applicable right now; but it is possible.<\/p>\n Question:<\/strong><\/p>\n A final question regarding Israel: Do you expect Israel to launch an attack? Is it possible for it to attack Lebanon as it did in Gaza? What is your view on Syria?<\/p>\n Answer:<\/strong><\/p>\n The only person who can answer this question on a global level is Donald Trump; but even he does not always answer.<\/p>\n Israel possesses a power that can even extricate itself from American decisions. Sometimes it is stronger than the Americans in the region; in fact, most of the time.<\/p>\n In our opinion, anything is possible. However, all polls indicate that Israel does not want a large-scale war in Southern Lebanon. Because this is costly, there are recruitment problems in the army, and it cannot achieve its objectives.<\/p>\n Currently, it is achieving its objectives in a better way; through assassinations and daily attacks, and everyone is applauding this.<\/p>\n Therefore, the probability of a war in the near future is weak; but it has not been completely eliminated.<\/strong><\/p>\n Notice this regarding Syria: Syrian officials met with Israelis in France in recent weeks. On the evening of the same day, the SDF [Syrian Democratic Forces] attacked.<\/p>\n When the talks in France failed, instructions were immediately issued to the SDF.\u00a0They want Ahmed al-Shara [Abu Mohammad al-Julani] to be in a state of submission and humiliation. They do not want him strong; not even if he were on their side.<\/strong><\/p>\n Furthermore, Israel does not want the unification of Syria either; however, if there is a bilateral agreement (in security, political, economic, and civilizational fields) with Israel, they would accept it.<\/p>\n In other words, they would accept a unified Syria only if it is a Syria that serves Israel. This is the conflict today.<\/strong><\/p>\n Despite all his negativity, Ahmed al-Shara has reached a stage where he cannot step back any further. If he does, he commits political suicide.<\/p>\n Harici:<\/strong><\/p>\n The Americans are exerting strong pressure on the Lebanese army to disarm Hezbollah. There are fears in Lebanon that this pressure could lead to internal conflict. So, in your opinion, is struggle and politics possible in Lebanon without weapons? And what is the possibility of peaceful coexistence with the Jewish community in the Middle East?<\/p>\n Answer:<\/strong><\/p>\n Yes, this is possible in principle; in fact, very possible.<\/p>\n However, I think the American stance and some Arab countries\u2014for example, Egypt\u2014have started talking about “controlling the weapons,” meaning locking them away, not using them. Not taking the weapons away completely.<\/p>\n This is a reasonable solution. Even Trump used this expression.<\/p>\n The important thing is that the weapons remain unused. Let them remain as a strategic reserve for the future.<\/strong><\/p>\n Taking these weapons, destroying them, or handing them over to Israel is impossible. Locking them away is possible, but surrendering them is not. Even Khaled Mashal said this: “We will lock the weapon, but we will not give it up.”<\/strong><\/p>\n So, is politics without weapons possible? Yes, of course, it is possible. Why not? Sometimes it can be even stronger.<\/p>\n Resistance against Israel without weapons might be weaker; but cultural, scientific, religious, and social resistance is possible.<\/p>\n Was Israel able to Israelize or Judaize the Palestinians of 1948? No, it failed.<\/p>\n Did the siege and killing manage to force the people of Gaza to surrender? No.<\/p>\n Did Egypt\u2019s 47-year peace with Israel Israelize the Egyptian people? Quite the contrary. For example, I watch a program on the Cairo and People channel, and I am astonished to see how great the hatred and opposition to Israel is.<\/p>\n Israel is a failed project, and whether with weapons or without, it will collide with the region.<\/strong><\/p>\n I say this because even the Zionist himself feels the failure of his project. Gideon Levy, the memoirs of former Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, and Ehud Barak\u2019s words about the end of Israel are examples of this.<\/p>\n The Zionist feels the end of Israel more than all Muslims do.<\/p>\n Therefore, no matter how much they try to support, strengthen, or sustain this project, it will not be long-lived.<\/p>\n We can live together with Jewish communities; but we cannot live with Zionism. There are vast Jewish communities that are opposed to the Zionist project.<\/strong><\/p>\n It is absolutely impossible to live with a Zionist who wants my land, kills me, takes all the sources of life from me, views me as an animal whose killing is permissible, and wants me to serve him.<\/p>\n Personally, when I was 13 years old, I had a Jewish friend in my class, and he was my companion. This was before 1967.<\/strong><\/p>\n In my city, Sidon, there are Jewish families still registered on the electoral lists today.<\/p>\n In 1947, a Jew from Sidon predicted that the State of Israel would be established and that it would inevitably perish.<\/p>\n Today, there is still a Jewish synagogue in Bhamdoun (Mount Lebanon), in Sidon, and in Wadi Abu Jamil.<\/p>\n We are not against Judaism as a religion, and we can live together with Jews.<\/p>\n As for the Zionists, we are against them; because they are the ones who altered the concept.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/harici.com.tr\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/2.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/harici.com.tr\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n