Convoluted Ayatollah logic

I admit I am having problems parsing this article from Iran's Ahlul Bayt News Agency:

Ayatollah Sadr el Din Ghabanchi, Iraqi prayer leader in Najaf referred to the efforts of the Zionist regime to promote hostility between Islamic denominations with Shia Muslims stressing that regional allies of the Zionist regime have turned into enemies of Shia.

Zionists are promoting hostility between Sunnis and Shia, so therefore Shia is obligated to be hostile to Sunni. I think.

He warned against talks on prevention of Shia Islam in Algiers denouncing Salafi groups for the effort.

Salafi groups denouncing Shia groups are bad, but rules to stop Shia groups from denouncing Salafis are also bad.

Orator of Najaf city in Iraq added that Shia Islam, in the light of domestic crisis in the region has turned to the central issue when regional states, having accepted their failure against the Zionist regime, have risen against Shia Muslims.

It sounds like he is saying thatsince Sunni regimes have admitted defeat against Zionists, they have become pro-Zionist puppets.

Iraqi cleric added,” While efforts to spread intrigues among Muslims and fueling civil war continues in Islamic countries to secure interests of the Zionist regime, Israel is in in a situation of relative security.” And added,” This is while Zionist regime authorities announce Al Qaeda a minor threat but Shia Islam a major one.”

He said,” This is quite right because Al Qaeda is the brainchild of world arrogant powers and is supported by great powers of the world.”

I'm sure there is a logic there, but I think it ends at "Shia good. Everyone else bad. Unity good as long as it supports Shiites."