the ‘group leader’ published a post on social media containing an inappropriate attack against me. he attached my picture and accused me of declaring my ‘neutrality’ regarding the iranian attacks against us.
when i asked him how he reached that conclusion, he sent the following excerpt, taken out of context, from my article published on march 31, 2026, titled “more dangerous than iran and israel” - “i am among the very few who maintain true neutrality in this country. despite all my journalistic battles, business interests, and the attacks, accusations, and both genuine and malicious lawsuits i have faced, i have maintained my neutrality, and refused to align with any political, sectarian, or social movement.”
the group leader conveniently ignored everything i said before and after that excerpt. he even overlooked the article’s title, so blatantly nationalistic in its implications, and fi xated on the word “neutrality”, interpreting it as an expression of my supposed “neutral” stance regarding the destruction, devastation, loss of life, and billions of dollars in lost revenue that my country is enduring. he failed to understand that his words amounted to an accusation of treason, which is an error unbecoming of someone who has spoken so much about his long journalistic career and his extensive knowledge.
yet, he could not even grasp the true meaning of neutrality in that passage, which simply refers to not belonging to any sect or political party.
the group leader conveniently ignored facts known to anyone who follows my articles and is familiar with my past positions on the iranian regime, positions that even reached the courts in a notorious “state security” case fi led against me by the iranian ministry of foreign affairs.
i nearly faced several years in prison because of that case. another well-known incident, witnessed by dozens of prominent figures, occurred in 2000, when i refused to join a meeting with hassan nasrallah at the height of his victories, because i believed he was acting in tehran’s interests rather than those of his homeland, lebanon.
this is in addition to the articles i have written over decades and the dozens of social media posts, some from just a few days or weeks ago, which have consistently been critical of the hard line religious regime in iran.
what would the group leader’s stance toward me have been if he were not a regular reader of my articles and had not followed them closely, as he himself acknowledged in his message, addressing me as “my dear friend, ahmad al-sarraf”?
i am neither foolish nor unpatriotic enough to declare in a widely circulated article that i am “neutral” regarding the current war between my country and a foreign enemy that has been bombarding us with hundreds of missiles and drones for over a month.
after accusing me of treason, he resorted to superficial flattery, claiming he does not doubt my patriotism and asserting that today we are all - kuwaitis, sunnis and shiites, urbanites and tribes - united against iranian treachery.
his admission that he follows my writing serves as evidence against him. he had no right to twist the word “neutrality” to suit his own agenda. this alone gives me grounds to sue him for questioning my loyalty to my country. my neutrality has always kept me free from sectarian or religious influence. yet, it is not in my character, especially at this time, to take legal action against him.
the nation needs our unity and solidarity, not baseless accusations against one another. the opportunists who supported the ‘group leader’s’ post do not deserve a response. they claim to be issuing “certificates of patriotism” even though no one has authorized them to do so.