Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Views on the news - 25/6/09

UN call to reform IMF and WB will fall on deaf ears

"The world institutions created generations ago must be made more accountable, more representative and more effective," UN Secretary General Ban said at the opening of a three-day meeting of the U.N. General Assembly on the global financial crisis and its impact on the developing world. "I regret that financial institutional reform has divided (U.N.) member states," he said. The question of reforming the IMF, World Bank and other international financial bodies was one of the issues that the 126 nations participating in this week's financial crisis had struggled to agree on during months of negotiations on a set of proposals for reforming the global financial system. A 15-page draft obtained by Reuters, said nations “recognize that it is imperative to undertake, as a matter of priority, a comprehensive and fast tracked reform of the IMF ... to increase its credibility and accountability, its legitimacy and effectiveness.” However, it is more than likely that the UN will fail to produce a set of concrete steps to redress the financial crisis. This is because the wealthy countries are too busy keeping their financial systems afloat by plundering third world. A point emphasized by Ban, “Surely if the world can mobilize more than $18 trillion to keep the financial sector afloat, it can find more than $18 billion to keep commitments to Africa,” Ban said.

Sarkozy attacks Islamic dress for women

This week President Sarkozy of France said that the head-to-toe Islamic garment for women was not a symbol of religion but a sign of subservience for women. ”The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience," he told members of both parliamentary houses gathered for his speech. "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic.” His comments follow an appeal last week by 65 French MPs for a parliamentary commission to examine whether Muslim women who cover themselves fully in public undermine the secular tradition in France as well as women's rights. The MPs represent parties ranging from the Communists to Mr Sarkozy's UMP. The call won instant support from members of Mr Sarkozy's centre-Right government but was opposed by the Socialists, the main opposition party. This is not the first time the French government has lamented over the dress code for Muslim women. In 2004, the country passed a controversial law forbidding wearing of veils from state schools and government offices. It is ironic that France claims to be the harbinger of religious freedom and tolerance, and yet this very notion is conspicuously forgotten when applied to Muslims living in France and the Muslim world.

Somalia: America makes last ditch attempt to rescue Sharif’s government

In the wake of the continued pressure from Islamists on the weakening Sharif’s regime in Somalia , the US has decided to send weapons to thwart a takeover the nation by Islamist Washington Post reported on Thursday. "A decision was made at the highest level to ensure the government does not fall and that everything is done to strengthen government security forces to counter the rebels," an unnamed U.S. official told the newspaper. The shipment of weapons and ammunition arrived this month in the Somali capital, Mogadishu , the official said. U.S. and Somali officials say that possibly hundreds of fighters from Afghanistan, Pakistan and other nations are fighting alongside the Islamist group known as al Shabab, which Washington has designated a terrorist group, the Post said. For the past 6 years or so, America has struggled to fashion a stable governments in Iraq , Afghanistan , Pakistan and Somalia . Rather then scaling back the Islamic revival in these countries, the continued US aggression against these countries is having the opposite effect. More and more people are now yearning for the re-establishment of the Caliphate.

Russia attacks Kyrgyzstan ’s u-turn over US military base

Russia accused Kyrgyzstan of treachery on Wednesday after the central Asian state revoked a Kremlin-backed order to close down a US military base considered vital for the war effort in Afghanistan . The Kyrgyz government agreed to expel US troops after receiving £1.3 billion in aid and soft loans from Moscow in February. But after the United States agreed to triple its rent for Manas, an important re-fuelling and re-supply base for US forces across the border in Afghanistan , Kyrgyzstan changed its mind -- to the fury of Russian officials. ”The Kyrgyz leadership has repeatedly stated that the decision to close the base was final and not subject to revision," said Andrei Nesterenko, a spokesman for the Russian foreign ministry. “The fact that the US military retains a presence in central Asia runs counter both to Russia 's interests and to our agreements with the Kyrgyz leadership.” Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, last year unilaterally declared the former Soviet Union to be part of Russia 's sphere of influence.
Russian fury over Kyrgyzstan ’s decision is likely to sour US-Russian relations further.

Iran plans stern action against the UK for fomenting unrest

This week, Britain reacted cautiously to a warning by Iran that it was considering downgrading diplomatic ties in the wake of continuing unrest over disputed presidential elections. Iran has accused two British officials of "activities inconsistent with their diplomatic status" - diplomatic language for spying - a charge flatly rejected by the Foreign Office.

The Iranian leadership, including the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly targeted Britain in recent days. The attacks appear to reflect long-standing Iranian suspicions of Britain dating back to the UK 's role in engineering a coup against the popular Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953.The Tehran regime has also complained about the reporting of the elections by the BBC's new Persian language service. Interestingly, Iran has not taken similar steps against the America —its so called arch enemy. Oddly enough, the US has been careful to harshly criticize the Iranian regime—suggesting that despite the fiery rhetoric between the two countries both governments are working in tandem to safeguard US interests stretching from Palestine to Afghanistan .

25/6/09

Monday, June 22, 2009

Saturday, June 20, 2009

The Crisis in Iran

1.What has caused the current crisis leading to huge demonstrations on the streets of Tehran?

The crisis has been caused by the outcome of the elections which took place on June 12th 2009.
The results of the elections were announced on June 13th 2009 by the Interior Minister Sadiq Mahsouli. He confirmed that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been re-elected to a second term after gaining 62% of the votes. Leading reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi gained a mere 33%. Mahsouli added that the turnout approached 85%, with a little more than 39 million of 46.2 million eligible voters casting their ballots. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei immediately issued a statement in which he praised the turnout and called on the public and the challengers to support the winner.

The European Union and several western countries expressed concern over alleged irregularities during the vote, and some analysts and journalists from the United States and European based media voiced doubts about the authenticity of the results.
Mousavi issued a statement saying, "I'm warning that I won't surrender to this charade," and he urged his backers to fight the decision as well as to avoid committing acts of violence. Protests, in favor of Mousavi and against the alleged fraud, then broke out in Tehran.
In essence the Western world and the opposition reformist candidates oppose the outcome of the elections.

2.Is there any truth in the claims?

A number of irregularities have been reported and some electoral engineering cannot be rules out. However the resounding silence from powerful figures like Rafsanjani and Larijani is a strong indication that the election results and claims of fraud are not compelling enough. The claims that the election was rigged will be difficult to verify - if there is an investigation. The final vote breakdown gives Ahmadinejad a huge margin of 11 million votes which even in a re-count will be very difficult to change.

Without an investigation it is difficult to decide if there was any vote engineering. However it is difficult to see how Ahmadinejad could have stolen the election by such a huge margin. To achieve such a feat he would have needed the cooperation of a large number of teams to have rigged polling booths. The risks involved would have been huge as Ahmadinejad has many powerful enemies who would have jumped on the opportunity to use this to their advantage. Mousavi after five days submitted his complaints to the Guardian council, however the mechanics of electoral fraud that he claims robbed him of Iran's presidency have still not materialised.

What makes the claims of the defeated reformists much weaker is Ahmadinejad's attendance of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit a few days after the disputed election result. This would not have been possible without the agreement of the supreme leader Ali Khamenei and other heavy weights in the regime.

The first Friday sermon after the election will in all likelihood bring to an end any possibility of continued demonstrations and a re-election. The supreme leader in his Friday sermon at Tehran University rebuked Mousavi for not accepting the election result and for allowing the demonstrations to take place. This in effect was a public endorsement of the election result by Iran's supreme body.

Currently the defeated reformists candidates claim the entire election is against the sentiments of Iranians, the majority of whom opposed incumbent Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his policies but whose will was thwarted by a falsification of the electoral results by an unpopular and dictatorial ruler who made it appear that he had won the election massively rather than lost it.

3.How much of the struggle is between the conservatives and reformists?

The conservatives rose to prominence for engineering the infamous Islamic revolution in 1979. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reportedly one of the masterminds behind the embassy hostage crisis in 1979 where the American embassy was taken over in support of the Iranian Revolution. Iran went through a period of international isolation by the international community, this led to the trust between Iran and the West reaching unprecedented lows. The death of Ayatollah Rahullah Khomini led to a number of clerics calling for an end to the international isolation and re-engagement with the West. Such calls for reform were led by Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami and such calls continue to cause a fault line in Iranian politics.
Mohammad Khatami withdrew as candidate from the election race and placed his support behind Mousavi in order to ensure reformist votes were not fractured. This election was a battle between the conservative candidate who believes in the Islamic revolution and the reformist candidate who believes Iran needs to move away from the Islamic revolution and begin engaging with the West. Currently the Iranian regime and its key organs are controlled by the conservatives.

The days after the election result has led to many demonstrations which have called for reform. For some time it seemed that Mousavi might be able to call for an uprising in Tehran. But the moment passed when Ahmadinejad's security forces on motorcycles intervened. And that leaves the West with its worst-case scenario: a democratically elected anti-liberal.

The Western media have given the electoral dispute much coverage and have presented it as the next colour revolution. Whilst both leading candidates represent opposite sides to where Iran should be going, the lines between them are today much blurred as both groups have been pursuing similar pragmatic policies.

Barack Obama's interview with CNBC's John Harwood was very telling: "The difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised. Either way, we are going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States."

Whilst in the past the demarcation between the reformists and conservatives was very clear, today this is not the case as both are pursuing similar polices. Whilst there are individuals from both groups who despise each other this is more personal rather then the conservative/reformists axis. Hence the despising of the reformist Ali Akbar Rafsanjani is more due to his corruption rather than him being a conservative.

4.The Western Media are reporting a revolution is in the making, is this the case?

The Western media have engaged in reporting that can only be considered over reporting and very biased coverage. The idea of a revolution in the making has come from Western reporting with slogans such as the twitter revolution, the Ipod generation, face book revolution, blog revolution and green revolution. Western coverage of the elections is rooted in the old axis of standing against the Islamic revolution and supporting the reformists who want a free and liberal Iran. The West has engaged with Iran on this basis and continues to do so.

The myth the Western world follow is that the fall the shah was due to a mass movement of people demanding liberalisation. If such a group of reformists are supported by the West they would become majority and rule the country. Western reporters believe that anyone who listens to beyonce owns an iPod, has a blog and knows what it means to Twitter must be an enthusiastic supporter of Western liberalism. Such individuals can be found among the professional classes in Tehran, as well as among students. Many speak English, making them accessible to Western journalists, diplomats and intelligence services. They are the ones who can speak to Westerners, and they are to speak to Westerners. It is from such people Westerners receive the information that a revolution is on hand. However such people are not the majority. Most Iranians are poor and unable to afford an Ipod let alone a phone and are content with Ahmadinejad's fiery anti Western rhetoric.

The defeated candidates also used the polls to prove their case. Almost all polls conducted predicted Ahmedinijad to lose the election. He had a dismal term and very few of his previous campaign policies never materialised, unemployment is at all time highs and Iran's energy infrastructure is crumbling. Supporters of his opponent, both inside and outside Iran, were stunned at the election result. The US based Strategic Forecasting - the intelligence agency reported: "A poll revealed that former Iranian Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi was beating Ahmadinejad. It is, of course, interesting to meditate on how you could conduct a poll in a country where phones are not universal, and making a call once you have found a phone can be a trial. A poll therefore would probably reach people who had phones and lived in Tehran and other urban areas. Among those, Mousavi probably did win. But outside Tehran, and beyond persons easy to poll, the numbers turned out quite different."

Abbas Barzegar, reporting for The Guardian, has described the Western reaction to the election results as evidence of wishful thinking. Western journalists, Barzegar argued, ‘have been reporting primarily from the wealthier areas of the greater cities, ignoring the wide support Ahmadinejad enjoys in poor and rural communities.'

However Iran-Western relations are changing and were first initiated by the Bush government. Iran continues to cooperate with the US and protect its interests. In Iraq Tehran continues to extend support to the leader of SCIRI, Ayatollah Hakim and the Badr Brigade who have become the lynchpin of US plans for Southern Iraq. In Afghanistan, Iran runs extensive reconstruction and training programs in Kabul, Herat and Kandahar. Thus far, Iran has successfully prevented American embarrassment in both countries. Whilst Western reporting is still restricted to the historical distrust Barack Obama plans to commence direct engagement with Tehran within the coming weeks.

5.Are the demonstrations evidence against the Islamic revolution and Islam itself?

Many Iranians in 1979 mobilised together to bring an end the rule of the Shah. His failed economic policies and authoritarian rule became the unifying factor between, reformists, Marxists, socialists, students, professors and anarchists. However the Islamic revolution brought nothing in terms of economic development, Khomeini began a process of securing his grip on the whole nation and exiled, assassinated and arrested many of those who brought him to power. The disastrous 8 year war with Iraq consumed the Iran economy creating even more poverty than prior to the revolution.

The Iran economy has long relied on its Oil and energy sectors. Iran has the world's largest gas field, the world's largest gas reserves after Russia and the world's largest oil reserves after Saudi Arabia. However Iran's 1940's constructed energy infrastructure is crumbling and inflation and unemployment is rampant and out of control. Ahmadinejad came to power on back of many economic promises that have not materialised. He has attempted to deal with this through a massive public spending programme and subsidised oil and gas - such subsidies are not sustainable. In 2007 due to massive mismanagement of the economy Ahmadinejad began the rationing of gas which caused riots.

The demonstrations that have filled the news stories of the West represent those who want change due to Ahmadinejad's economic failure. He has reneged on all his economic promises and created an economic bomb that will go off very soon. The election victory is seen by many in Iran as a continuation of such failed policies. Ahmadinejad has done nothing for the 3 million unemployed. While the catalyst for these demonstrations was an election, the election issues were the economy and unemployment. The Western media continues to propagate the demonstrators represent Iranian public sentiment, they fail to see the economic legacy that haunts the country or a very important issue that day by day is becoming even clearer - the demonstrations are simply supporters of candidates who were massively defeated.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Q&A: North Korea's Nuclear Tests

(This is a translation of an Arabic article)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Question:
North Korea announced on 25th May, 2009, that it carried out a successful nuclear test. It had earlier (on 8th May) warned that it was strengthening its nuclear arsenal, and accused the Obama administration of hostile actions against it. It had also refused to resume the six-party negotiations. Then on 27th May, 2009, it declared that North Korea was 'not committed to the ceasing of hostilities' signed with the United States. This refusal was in response to South Korea's participation in the American initiative to prevent nuclear proliferation. [al-Jazeerah: 31.05.09].

What is the reaction of the international community towards these events? Are these leading to an escalation of tensions and war, or is a war ruled out; will negotiations be resumed?

Answer:

Yes, indeed there is escalation of tension especially after North Korea's refusal to back away from the armistice which was signed between North Korea and the US on 27th July, 1953 which resulted in ending the Korean War which was raging since 25th June, 1950. This armistice was simply a ceasing of hostilities and not a peace treaty as such. The escalation in tensions came to fore when North Korea carried out its first nuclear test in October, 2006, and reached alarming levels last month when it tested its ballistic missiles which means that North Korea is now capable of launching its long-range nuclear warhead missile without having to use aircrafts which may be confronted and prevented from reaching their target. Then after the 25th May, 2009 test, tensions have reached to even more alarming levels when it announced its latest successful nuclear test.

As for the international reactions:

1. International reactions have come from various countries calling for a UN Security Council resolution to penalise North Korea. While North Korea has warned of taking other steps as well, the official North Korean News Agency carried a statement on 25th May, 2009 of the North Korean Foreign Ministry's official spokesman saying: "If the UNSC will make further provocative actions, this will inevitably lead to the DPRK's approach towards adopting stronger self-defensive counter-measures."

2. With regard to the US reaction, Barack Obama has stated: "North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security, and I strongly condemn their reckless action. North Korea's action pose a grave security threat to the people North-East Asia and it is a flagrant violation of the international law as well as North Korea's earlier commitments. Now the US and the international community must take steps to counter that." [Russia Today: 25.05.2009].

The US Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated at the Asian Security Forum conference held in Singapore that: "The United States will not accept North Korea as a nuclear-weapons state." He warned against the flaring of a nuclear arms race and said: "We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in the region, or on us." On the issue of nuclear proliferation, Gates said: "The transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or non-state entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States and its allies, and we would hold North Korea fully accountable for the consequences of such action." [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09]. This is how the US expressed its anger over the North Korean actions and indicated that these acts constitute a threat to world peace, especially in North East Asia and it (US) will take steps against North Korea which it warned against transferring the nuclear technology to other countries or non-state entities.

America's story with North Korea's nuclear programme is not new, in fact it began in 1986 when the US demanded detailed information on its nuclear programme which North Korea refused to hand over to the US, instead it gave those detailed documents running into 19,000 pages to China. An agreement was reached between US and North Korea in 1994 after the US warned North Korea to targeting its nuclear reactors. This agreement calls for putting North Korea's nuclear programme to a halt, shutting down of its Yongbyon reactors which was in operation since 1987. This was in exchange for the US supplying two light-water type reactors. But the US failed to honour its part of the promise and hence Korea resumed its nuclear activities, restarted the Yongbyon reactors and expelled the two international observers from the country in 2002. This was after the US accused it of carrying on a clandestine nuclear programme and North Korea counter accusing the US of breaching its promises to supplying two light-water powered nuclear reactors.

In October, 2006, North Korea announced its first nuclear test, and in February 2007, the six-party gathering which comprises the North & South Koreas, the United States, Russia, China and Japan reached an agreement to shut down the Yongbyon reactors in exchange for assistance in fuel supplies and the US announced an assistance of $25 million. After this cash assistance reached North Korea, it allowed access to inspection and observers‘ teams and shut down the Yongbyon reactors. Then in July 2008, North Korea submitted its report on the nuclear programme within the framework of the deal that called for scrapping its nuclear programme.

The talks ended between them in 2008 as a result of their differences on ways to verify compliance to North Korea's earlier obligations provided for in the previous agreements.
In the beginning of the current year, North Korea declared its withdrawal from the six-party talks and resumption of the Yongbyon reactors after having expelled the two international observers and threatened to resume its nuclear tests. In April this year, it carried out a test of its long-range missile capable of carrying satellites as it mentioned. The UN Security Council passed a resolution in condemnation and called for applying sanctions which were earlier frozen after the resolution no. 1718 of 2006 in the aftermath of its first nuclear test. Then on 14th April, 2009, it announced its decision to withdraw from the six-party talks in the wake of a UNSC resolution the previous day. It called the six-party talks as pointless and stated that it was no longer obliged to comply with any agreements reached among the group. A few days back, i.e. on 25th May, 2009, it announced the successful nuclear test.

From the above, it is evident that the United States has been cheating North Korea by requiring it to shut down its nuclear activities in exchange for no incentive except false promises and obligations which are either delayed, denied or short-changed. However, the North Koreans are aware of it all. Whenever it saw the US evading or dodging, it resumed its nuclear activity. It appears that the US has not been conclusively decisive on the subject. Perhaps it is because it does not intend to strain its relations with China where it has its interests which are far more important and bigger than the nuclear reactors in North Korea.

Also, from America's actions, its statements and its reactions to the events in the North East Asian region, it is clear that the US has other objectives. One of these goals is to strengthen its presence in the region and consolidate itself there in order to render the countries in that region to become dependent upon US assistance. This will ensure that US is in a position to exploit and extortionate them especially since it has a large military presence in the area with a troop strength of around 250,000. So we see the US Defense Secretary, Robert Gates holding a special meeting with the defence ministers of South Korea and Japan on the sidelines of the Asian Security Forum being held currently in Singapore, after which he announced: "it is vital that United States, South Korea and Japan as well as the entire world cooperate to face this multi-faceted problem." [Radio Sawa: 31.05.09].

This means that the US is harnessing this crisis in order to strengthen its own stronghold in the region and demonstrate its leadership to the world as well as scare China that it (US) may perhaps start a war in the region with China's neighbour and ally, North Korea at any time. In other words, the US wants to use this opportunity to blackmail China in order to extract compromises from it in the area of economy, trade and finance as well as regional political issues and thereby prevent or at least delay merger of Taiwan into China. Thus China can be restrained and tied within its own borders by using the issue of North Korea's nuclear and missiles issue. This is not strange or unexpected of America which is trying to install anti-missile guns in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic against Russia citing threats from Korean and the Iranian missiles.

3. As for China's stance, it is a repetition of its earlier stand when North Korea had conducted its first test. China had called for restraint and diplomatic efforts. At the Asian Security Forum in Singapore, the Chief of Staff of the Chinese Armed Forces Gen. Ma Shao Tian called for adopting calm and calibrated methods in dealing with North Korea. He also called for eliminating all weapons of mass destruction from the region [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09].

This indicates that China is not ready for a strike on North Korea. Just as the US is exploiting the nuclear issue, the Chinese are also trying to make use of the opportunities presented by North Korea's nuclear and missile tests. It is using the North Korean card to deal with the Taiwan issue and to facilitate its merger into mainland China. The Chinese objective appears to be to use this as a pressure tool upon the US so that America accedes to Taiwan's merger with the mainland. Thus both the United States as well as China are exploiting the Korean problem vis-a-vis Taiwan, but of course in opposite directions.

4. As for South Korea, it does not want to see any more deterioration in the situation which may lead to war which certainly will be to its disadvantage. The South Korean Defence Minister Lee Sang Hee told the Asian Security Forum in Singapore that his country will work with the six-party forum and the international community to find a solution to the solve the crisis with North Korea. [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09]. South Korea has consistently been attempting to resolve its problems with North Korea and two summit meetings have been held between their presidents in 200 C.E and 2007 C.E, each of them on South Korean initiative.

5. As regards the Russian reaction, it came in the statement issued by the Russian President's Office after the telephone conversation between President Medvedev and Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso. It said that the two sides agree on the importance of a strong response towards these actions that constitute a threat to the world security regime. [Russia Today: 30.05.09]. Alexei Borodavkin, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia called upon Pyong Yang to desist from launching its ballistic missile. [Russia Today: 27.03.09].

This indicates that Russia's position on the North Korean issue differs from that of China and that by adopting such a stance, Russia aims to have very good relations with Japan. It also indicates that Russia does not have an interest in North Korea developing its nuclear and missiles programme, and also that Russia does not want the US to use this issue as a pretext and gain a stronghold in the region. Russia also wants North Korea to remain committed to the six-party dialogue and not withdraw from it so that a solution can be reached to halt its nuclear and missile programme and thereby put an end to what is referred to as the Korean Peninsula conflict.

6. As for whether this escalation of tension would lead to war, or will the US strike at the North Korean nuclear installations, well, it is improbable and far-fetched, at least in the foreseeable future. America did not resort to such measures when North Korea did not have either a nuclear warhead or ballistic missile and the US was aware that Pyong Yang was heading in that direction and expected it to eventually acquire nuclear capability. How can it now strike when North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and especially since its Pyong Yang still has strong relations with China?

Thus the chances of America launching attacks on North Korea are very slim in the near future at least. However it is expected that America will resort to other means and incentives to bring North Korea to the negotiating table and by bringing South Korea closer to it using various means to penetrate there and find channels of communications with some North Korean elements through which to work to change the leadership and bringing in a more moderate leadership, i.e. a leadership which understands America and accepts its offers and inducements.
This is the method which America had adopted with all the communist countries. North Korea meanwhile is facing a severe economic crisis as a result of its strict isolation. Though the desired results cannot be guaranteed through all these efforts, America however is expected to exert all it can.

7th Jumadah al thani, 1430 A.H
31st, May, 2009 C.E

Arabic Source

Protest in Mauritius against the PK govt's actions in Swat

The following are photos of a demonstration that took place outside the embassy of Pakistan in Mauritius by Members of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Mauritius on Friday 29th May 09.













Friday, June 12, 2009

Audio: Obama's visit to Cairo

Khutba by Sheikh Abu Talha in Arabic and English

http://www.esnips.com/doc/a5cd2330-13bb-41ad-b76d-3f62955a7d94/Obamas-visit-to-cairo

Obama “conquers” Muslim countries, beginning with Turkey, through Egypt and on to Saudia!

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Not even two months have passed since Obama visited and spoke in Istanbul, and now he has crossed the entire breadth of Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula. The Egyptian regime laid out a red carpet welcome for him, this morning, Thursday, 4th June, 2009, as if a victor was being received! Right from nine in the mornning when his plane landed, or even before that, there was an unprecedented level of maximum security in and around the airport. The security forces were everywhere and so were the elaborate protocols in honour of the President of the United States of America, the head of Kufr (disbelief), whose hands are still stained with blood of Muslims from Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan etc….

The Egyptian regime prepared an elaborate convoy for President Obama, who was flanked on all sides by the elite cavalry guard and accompanying luxury limousines, replete with music bands. He was received at the presidential palace al-Qubba’s entrance, by the president of the Egyptian regime, with full honours, and then taken to the Cairo University to rise to its podium and address the Muslims!

Despite the fact that his speech did not differ in content from the policies of his predecessor, either with reference to the subject of American wars on Muslim countries, or on the issue of Palestine, the US’s special relationship with Jewish state, or the issue of nuclear weapons or in relation to any major or marginal issue, his speech throughout remained focused on US interests and all the way through the speech he tried to influence the Muslim public opinion, to take it in their stride or ‘digest’ the American wars on the Muslim lands.

Yet, the outline of his speech stood out from those of his predecessor for being deceptively soft and all-embracing, it was certainly an exercise in public-relations, it was worthy to be heard for Obama’s own convictions and the art of deception:

وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَهُمْ تُعْجِبُكَ أَجْسَامُهُمْ وَإِنْ يَقُولُوا تَسْمَعْ لِقَوْلِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ خُشُبٌ مُسَنَّدَةٌ يَحْسَبُونَ كُلَّ صَيْحَةٍ عَلَيْهِمْ هُمُ الْعَدُوُّ فَاحْذَرْهُمْ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ .
"And when you look at them, their bodies please you; and when they speak, you listen to their words. They are as blocks of wood propped up. They think that every cry is against them. They are the enemies, so beware of them. May Allâh curse them! How are they denying (or deviating from) the Right Path?" [Surah al-Munafiqoun: 04]

This was as far as the public relations exercise went. As for the sensitive issues and credible matters, the speech was sharply flagrant and offensive and it demonstrated his unapologetic hostility for the Muslim issues:

وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ
"But what their breasts conceal is far worse." [Surah aal-'Imran: 118]

He began with threats against what he called the “terrorists” and separatists in Afghanistan and Pakistan and vowed that he will never tolerate them and will call upon nations to fight them. He boasted that he cobbled up a coalition of 46 countries to fight them in Afghanistan! He is not satisfied with that, but has begun to fire missiles on Pakistan directly and indirectly and is not concerned about this, rather, he justified the killing of women, children and the elderly. This has happened repeatedly in Afghanistan and he justified these as unintended errors!! And of course if the killing of women and children does not come to light, then the death-toll is simply accounted for as the killings of the separatists. As a matter of fact, Obama regards any Muslim who adheres to his faith, who does not want his country to be occupied by America or who does not tolerate his sanctities being violated by the Jews, as extremist and “terrorist”!

Yet despite all his evil deeds, in spite of the brutal and non-stop killings in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama repeated the words he had spoken in Turkey, that he does not want to fight Islam and Muslims! The Prophet (saw) truthfully said in his noble hadith:

«إِذَا لَمْ تَسْتَحِ فَاصْنَعْ مَا شِئْتَ»
“If you are not ashamed, do as you please”.

The American troops have committed slaughter in the Muslim lands, waging bloody wars against Muslims, day and night, killing Muslims and relentlessly expelling people from their homelands…. Yet Obama repeats that he is not fighting Muslims!

He then shifted to Palestine and declared forcefully that America’s relations, both military and otherwise, with the Jewish state which has usurped the Palestinian lands, were permanent and cannot be severed. He declared that that the Jewish state will remain on the occupied Palestinian lands and that he will not accept any alternative to this! Obama then stressed the two-state solution i.e. the right of Jews over most of the Palestinian lands and in exchange for this guarantee, small, insignificant lands, if at all, to be called the homeland for Palestinians! He then referred to the issue of settlements and touched upon the naïve sensitivities of trusting people and said that he wants an end to settlements; which implies not removing the already established settlements, rather merely stopping new ones, when there is no more land that the Jews consider secure enough for their settlements, except if they were to build fortresses and castles! And even this so-called ceasing of settlements is conditional on cessation of all hostilities against the Jewish state, holding along the entire course of the fatal path of his Road Map!
Then he stumbled upon the nuclear weapons issue in his speech and focused on Iran. He clarified that he wants to see a nuclear free Middle-East, where there is no race for nuclear armament. He conveniently forgot the Jewish state, which he knows is a state with nuclear weapons!
Despite his entire speech being full of threats on the issues of Muslims, the Egyptian regime welcomed this man, who came with his evil and sweet smooth-talk, attempting to cover the stains of innocent blood that he and his troops have spilled in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. The Egyptian regime arranged for a crowd, clapping and waving, to give the impression and perception of acceptance of his venomous speech by the Egyptian people.

This arranged and fake applause was evident for anyone who kept his eyes open. How else could one applaud the two-nation proposal? Could any Muslim accept - let alone applaud - the partition of the blessed lands of Isra’ wal Mi’raj to be shared between him and the illegitimate usurper?

How could a Muslim clap his hands and applaud Obama, while he cites the ayah of the Quran out of its context:

مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا
"If anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind," [Surah al-Maa'idah: 32]

He referred to such Muslims who fight America as extremists, although this ayah was the first to be revealed about Bani Israel, yet Obama refers to Muslims who defend their faith, their people, and fights those who violate upon Muslims and considers them as those who have killed the entire mankind. Yet the same Obama fails to see the state of Jews, which has relentlessly been killing innocent people, usurping their lands, expelling them from their own homeland, violating their sanctities, creating mischief and wreaking havoc. Yet, Obama does not term all these acts as killing entire mankind! Nor does he consider the slaughter by his American troops as killing of mankind, Allah says:

كَبُرَتْ كَلِمَةً تَخْرُجُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ إِنْ يَقُولُونَ إِلَّا كَذِبًا
"Mighty is the word that comes out of their mouths. They utter nothing but a lie." [Surah al-Kahf: 5]

How could he be cheered and applauded when he asserts that the existing settlements are not a problem, but building new ones is a problem? The fact is that both types are illegitimate! Is it not only the unthinking stooges of this system who could stand up to cheer him for his remarks!?
Al Quds was first liberated by Omar (ra) who decreed that no Jew will reside there. It was again liberated by Salahuddin, and yet Obama declares this al-Quds as the common homeland of the Jews, Christian and Muslims? How could anyone cheer Obama for such comments, and yet the fact remains that he was referring to the Eastern portion of al Quds and not the Western part!
Indeed, all the applause was fake and make-believe and the regime was not able to conceal this clumsy fact, despite the fact that it had arranged the entire stage to project Obama image as being friendly and portray him as a just and tolerant man and also to cover-up the image of Egypt as a stooge of America, which stands neutral in its view of Palestine and treats both the usurpers of Palestine and the rightful Palestinians as same, rather its neutrality is inclined towards the Jewish entity!

O Muslims!
Indeed, Obama has come to you in the garb of a harmless saint, so that you do not see his real-self. He is far more dangerous than the one who does not conceal his hostility towards you. All this is to make you approach him for your problems. Remember, the naked reality of America under Bush is not a matter of a by-gone past. America has chosen to attack your lands, despite the fact that are already ruled by its henchmen and stooges. Despite its vast and enormous weapons, armaments and open hostility towards you, America was under awe and scared of you. But in spite of its occupation of your lands and killing of its people, Obama wants you to cheer and clap for him. He is using his patent smile to deceive you into being loyal to him! As a poet said:

يعطيك من طرف اللسان حلاوةً ويَروغُ منك كما يَروغُ الثعلب
“He comes to you with his sweet tongue” “But he is as cunning and crafty as a fox!”

O Muslims!
Obama has not randomly selected these three venues from where he cunningly addressed you. These landmarks are chosen with great care and meaning: He launched from Istanbul, passing over the Arabian Peninsula and came to the lands of Egypt. He is fully aware that Istanbul is the land of Sultan al-Fateh and it stood as barrier and prevented the Jews from usurping control over Palestine. He is aware that the Arabian Peninsula was the launch-point of the first Islamic State from where Omar (ra) emerged and liberated al-Quds. And Obama is well aware that the land of Egypt was the province of Salahuddin’s, from where he launched and liberated al-Quds from the Crusaders!

Obama is fully aware of these facts, so he has come to these countries carrying the message that the era of your pride and prestige is over and done with, and that power and authority now is at the command of Obama and his allies and America enjoys supremacy. More than many Muslims, the Kuffar colonialists are aware of the power centres and sources of strength. They study our history, our faith and are aware of our source of our strength as well as the laudable traits of this Ummah. It was not a mere coincidence that he mentioned the ayah of the Quran:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ مِنْ ذَكَرٍ وَأُنْثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا
"O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you may know one another." [Surah al-Hujurat: 13]

And stopped before referring to its last part, without which it is not complete, where it says:

إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ
"Verily, the most honourable of you with Allâh is that (believer) who has At-Taqwâ [i.e. he is one of the Muttaqûn (the pious.)." [Surah al-Hujurat: 13]

Obama conveniently forgot to mention that it is Taqwah, which makes the Islamic Ummah honourable and renders America and its allies humiliated and degraded.

O Muslims!
Obama tried to portray himself as if he ruled over the world and all the so-called states in the Muslims lands were servants to him, who give him what ever he wished. They laid out rosy decorations for his reception, far more than he is entitled to in his own country! His liking is that of the Pharaoh and his people:

فَاسْتَخَفَّ قَوْمَهُ فَأَطَاعُوهُ إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا قَوْمًا فَاسِقِينَ
"Thus he [Fir'aun (Pharaoh)] befooled (and misled) his people, and they obeyed him. Verily, they were ever a people who were Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh).” [Surah az Zukhruf: 54]

It is another matter that Obama was clever, smart and crafty, as he tries to project himself in his speech. He should realise that the land of Istanbul, the Arabian Peninsula and Egypt have not welcomed him. In fact, he should know that he was welcomed by the treacherous group of rulers, whom the Muslims by and large have rejected and ostracized. He should also be aware that his smooth, deceptive talk and the softness of his words have not gone unnoticed by the Muslims, who fully well realise the real meanings concealed craftily behind these words. Obama will do well to see that the cheers and clapping is what the men in these welcoming regimes do routinely for their masters.

Hizb ut-Tahrir declares to Obama and to the entire world that Islam has its sincere and dedicated men, who shall definitely establish the Islamic State in the world, not by exploiting the world or colonising it and pillaging its resources; but through establishing justice, eliminating oppression, restoring rights to all where it is due. This is when America will find its rightful place which is of humiliation and submission, and the Jewish entity, which has illegitimately occupied the Palestinian lands, will be eliminated once and for all restoring the whole of Palestine to the Islamic State. This is when the earth will witness the re-emergence of the Khilafah and goodness will prevail in every corner of the world.

وَاللَّهُ غَالِبٌ عَلَى أَمْرِهِ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
"And Allâh has full power and control over His Affairs, but most of men know not." [Surah Yousuf: 21]

Hizb-ut-Tahrir
4th June 2009 CE
11th Jamadi al Thani 1430 AH

Monday, June 08, 2009

Q&A: The Game Behind the Agreements between Sudan and Chad

بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

On 4th May 2009, Sudan signed an agreement with Chad in Doha, under the joint auspices of Qatar and Libya. This agreement aims to cease mutual hostilities and prevent use of arms as a means of settling disputes between them as well as to operationalise their previous agreements. But the very next day Chad accused Sudan of sending an armed group to its eastern part, while on 15th May, 2009, Sudan charged Chad of firing two missiles from air on its territory. Chad acknowledged these raids and said that these were aimed at rebel mercenaries in Sudan who operate against Chad.

This Doha agreement is the 7th such agreement between the two countries, the earlier ones were signed in Tripoli (Moracco), Makkah, Riyadh and Dakar. Often it has so happened that whenever an agreement was signed, or such an understanding was reached, one of these parties has breached the agreement even before the ink on such papers dried. Each has accused the other of violating the terms of agreements and of supporting their rewspective rebels. These agreements have been little more than child's play which they have signed but not complied with; they were like tools to deceive the other party while beleiving that they have honoured the agreements! Some times these agreements were signed merely to placate the mediating parties, only to return to their earlier manner soon after!

It appears that the conflict between the two countries regimes is destined to go on until atleast one of them falls to give way to a political alternative different from the current one. This is because the dispute between them is neither local nor regional, rather it has an international aspect to it, i.e. it echoes a conflict between big countries; France supports the Idrees Deby regime in Chad. In the midst of these events, the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner addressed the Foreign Relations committee of the French National Assembly and said: "Sudan clearly bears responsibility at this stage of events because evey one is aware that thousands of rebels have infiltrated into the (Chad) border". He added: "Everyone is watching and knows the irony that an attack was launched soon after the (Doha) agreement was signed at 8.00 p.m and on the next day, the rebels forces attcked from the Sudanese side." [AFP: 22.05.09]. here Kouchner is not merely defending Chad while accusing Sudan of attcking, but his words imply as if France itself is a directly affected party which is under attack. It may be mentioned that the eastern region of Chad and the north-eastern regions of the Central African Republic has about 3700 troops from the European Union, most of them French soldiers. This testifies that France is backing the Deby regime of Chad and it is in her interest to defend him because it is Deby who is protecting the French influence in Chad and the surrounding areas for which Chad serves as the launching point.

As for Idrees Deby's views on the cureent events, he has said: "Everyone who demands Deby's ouster or destruction of Chad are mistaken, it will never happen". [AFP: 22.05.09]. Thus he is fully aware that the rebels are opposed to him and his regime.

As for Sudan's reaction to the events, Ali Siddiq, the spokesman of the Sudanese foregn ministry stated: "The Sudanese forces are fully prepared to hit back, but we are waiting for instructions". [AFP: 17.05.09].

The government of Omar al-Basheer said that it has evidence implicating Chad in the chaotic events and of supporting the Justice and Equality Movement of Sudan which is fighting the Sudanese government in the Darfur region. [Radio Sawa: 18.05.09]. This indicates that the coming days will witness new events between the two countries and also that the rebels movements in both countries are linked to the happenings in Darfur. While the French activity appears to be through its agents and the rebels.

As for who is backing Basheer's regime, it is the United States of America. We have seen how the US supported it at the International Court of Justice when Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Republican party's former presidential candidate, toured Sudan for three days just after the ICJ's decision ordering arrest of Omar al-Basheer for a short period of less than a month and half. John Kerry, while meeting with several senior Sudanese officials, announced that he will work to deveolp relations between the two countries.

On 18th March, 2009, i.e. immedeately after the International Court of Justice's ruling, the US
administration appointed a presdential delegation under General Scott Grayson to improve relations with Sudan. John Kerry told a press conference in Sudan: "Thanks to the special efforts of the President Obama's special delegation under General Scott Grayson and the willingness of the Sudanese government to enter into new dialogue with us, humanitarian activities will partially be restored". He added: "The United States is interested in improving bilateral relations with Khatoum." [AFP: 18.04.09]. He said: "I believe that the coming few weeks will witness improvement in one of the aspects like striking out the name of Sudan from the list of countries that support terrorism and also lifting of economic sanctions against Sudan." He further added: "The US Presidential envoy General Scott Grayson has successfully begun this process and during his visit to Sudan this month and his visit which ended last week, he has laid the basic groundwork to build future relations between Sudan and the US and that his (Kerry's) visit will provide a further boost to such efforts." [al-Sharq al-Awsat: 18.04.09]. All this indicates American support to Basheer's regime and that America stands behind him.

Thus the US will not abandon Omar al-Basheer's regime just yet, it will work to support him directly and indirectly through its agents in the region like in Egypt and Ethiopia etc. Because since his coming to power in 1985, Bashher has easliy achieved all of US goals.
As for Idrees Deby, he has been a French agent in the region eversince coming to power in 1990 and has served France's interests throughout. The rebels movements against him began in 1998 and have continued to oppose and openly challenge his regime to this day. One such powerful resistance movement has declared that it will launch an assualt before the rainy season, i.e. during the month of June next. The source said: "The Movement is not finished yet." [AFP: 22.05.09].

This means that attacks will continue against the regime of Idrees Deby and may again threaten his regime directly as had happened during February last year when the rebels were able to reach Deby's Presidential Palace and laid seige around it. Chad has already expressed fears of new attacks against it by the rebels; the Chad Defence Minister Adoum Younousmi stated that his country was preparing it's armed forces to enter Sudan in the next few hours to preempt a new attack planned by the rebels in the areas along its eastern borders. [19.05.09].

It is in America's interest to dethrone the Deby regime and replace it with its own agents in order to consolidate its stronghold and pillage its resources so that it can oust France from Chad which is financing the rebels in Darfur and working through them in order to strengthen its influence in the Darfur region by involving its agents like the Movement for Justice and Equality in Sudan and the faction of the Sudanese Liberation Movement led by Abdul Wahid who is now residing in France. On the other hand, America is using these activities to frustrate the French efforts and the International Court of Justice which is backed by the EU and particularly by France. These activities are designed to prevent the arrest and prosecution of Omar al-Basheer which will weaken the actions of the ICJ in this regard. The various parties are now taking recourse to the article 16 of the UNSC which provides for delaying arrests of the wanted men by the ICJ by a period of one year which is renewable.

Indeed, Sudan is vital for qall rival colonial powers in the region, be it the US or the European countries. Javier Solana, the EU High Representative of the Common Foreign and Security Policy emphasised the importance of Sudan when he said: "Sudan has not stabilised yet, its stability is fundamental for the entire African continent and the international community especially Europe which must move and take action to achieve results there." He added: "The EU must continue to maintain its presence (in Sudan) at all levels, political, economic and humanitarian."

Therefore the conflict will continue to rage in the region between the colonial powers i.e. the US and Europe until one of them has consolidated its control and repulsed the rival power, or the Islamic Ummah rises up and repels both of these parties from the region and assumes the administration of its affairs to solve its problems and the proxy systems prevalent in the Muslim world are dethroned erasing the articial boundaries between Sudan and Chad to unite them as part of a single state.

27th Jumadah al- Oulah, 1430 A.H
22nd May, 2009 C.E

Foreign Embassies in Muslim Lands

The US plans to build a huge embassy in Islamabad that will rival the recently completed US embassy in Baghdad. Historically, such foreign embassies were used by the colonial powers to destroy the Khilafah. Today, they continue this work by wreaking havoc in the affairs of the Ummah. Allah (swt) has commanded us to deal with other states in a specific manner and He has ordered us to admit foreign ambassadors into Muslim lands by giving them diplomatic immunity ONLY in their capacity as an ambassador and for the mission they were sent. The foreign embassies as they currently operate are haram and must be rejected by the Ummah. We must explain the reality of foreign embassies to our fellow Muslims, especially family members living in the Muslim world so that they may be aware of the danger they pose to our lands.

Last week, the media reported that the United States is planning to build a massive embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan. According to the Miami Herald, "the plan calls for the rapid construction of a $111 million new office annex to accommodate 330 workers; $197 million to build 156 permanent and 80 temporary housing units; and a $405 million replacement of the main embassy building." This project is in addition to the reconstruction of the consular buildings in Lahore and Peshawar. Jonathan Blyth, director of external affairs at the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations in Washington, said in his comment about the project, "For the strong commitment the U.S. is making in the country of Pakistan, we need the necessary platform to fulfil our diplomatic mission. The embassy is in need of upgrading and expansion to meet our future mission requirements." Khurshid Ahmad, a member of Pakistan's upper house of parliament for Jamaat-e-Islami said, "This is a replay of Baghdad. This [Islamabad embassy] is more [space] than they should need. It's for the micro and macro management of Pakistan, and using Pakistan for pushing the American agenda in Central Asia."

Khurshid was referring to the gigantic US embassy in Iraq that opened in January of this year. According to FoxNews, the embassy is 104 acres which is approximately the size of 80 football fields! Like a small city in the United States, it includes a cinema, retail and shopping areas, restaurants, schools, a fire station, power and water treatment plants, telecommunications and wastewater treatment facilities and houses 1,000 employees in 6 apartment blocks. The International Crisis Group said about the embassy, "The presence of a massive U.S. embassy - by far the largest in the world - co-located in the Green Zone with the Iraqi government is seen by Iraqis as an indication of who actually exercises power in their country."

The Muslim lands are littered with foreign embassies. While on the surface, these embassies may appear to be simple buildings upon which diplomats are housed, they are more often than not, used as a tool for foreign powers to gain access to the region, gather intelligence, spread secular-Capitalist values and exert political influence. As the role that these embassies play in the Muslim lands today becomes clearer, it is important to remember their involvement in abolishing the Uthmani Khilafah.

Role of Foreign Embassies in Destroying the Khilafah

When Britain and France lost hope in defeating the Islamic State through military force (i.e. the Crusades), they took a different direction and attacked the Islamic Ummah by using Western thoughts to shake her confidence in Islam. To achieve their aims, the Colonial powers turned towards an intellectual struggle. In 1625 they moved their base of operations from Malta to Beirut while also establishing a presence in Istanbul. The English and French embassies worked energetically with American institutions, such as the predecessor to the American University of Beirut (namely the Protestant College) in order to advance their objectives. The English and French embassies in Istanbul, Damascus, Beirut and Cairo worked actively in destroying the Khilafah.

For example, between 1912-1913 the European embassies assisted in creating nationalist parties such as the Decentralization Party in Cairo and the Reform Committee in Beirut. Between 1915-1916, Jamal Pasha, the Commander of the Uthmani Army in Syria seized documents from the French consulate in Damascus, proving that some Arab youth were perpetrating treason against the Khilafah by acting on the guidance of France and on the orders of Britain. The foreign embassies in the Khilafah worked at all levels of society, especially on the political and intellectual mediums to attract the youth, military and government personnel to secular-Capitalist thoughts. This effort had its intended effect - the hearts and minds of some of the Muslims became enchanted with the secular-Capitalist culture, while the general population of the Muslims began to doubt the suitability of Islam in the current age. These efforts were an important factor amongst others that led to the destruction of the Khilafah in 1924.

Foreign Embassies in Muslim Lands Today

While it is clear that in the past foreign embassies have played a pivotal role in shaping the thoughts and ideas of many of the sons and daughters in the Ummah, the present day situation has not changed. For example:

• Azerbijan - In April 2005, the leader of the pro-government Motherland Party, Fazail Agamali, expressed his discontent with the US ambassador's trips to the country's regions, where he met activists of opposition parties. Faizal said, "This is not in line with the mandate of an ambassador, causes concern and brings about unpleasant talks and rumours."
• Egypt - In May 2006, Egyptian lawmakers accused the US ambassador Francis Ricciardone of interfering in Egypt's domestic affairs. MP Kemal Ahmed quoted Ricciardone as saying, "The US has interests and pays money to the Egyptian government, which must work to achieve those interests." The US embassy denied making these comments. However, in March 2005, David Welch, American Ambassador to Egypt announced that $1 million would be granted to Egyptian NGOs that had ideas for democracy-building activities. The grant was a part of the Greater Middle East Partnership Initiative by the US which proposed a more active US involvement in Egypt.
• Lebanon - Last month, the Head of Hezbollah's parliamentary block, MP Mohammad Raad, said that US ambassador Michele Sison was meddling in the formation of the ruling majority election lists.
• Kenya - Last month, US ambassador Michael Ranneberger was accused by the Kenyan MPs of "behaving like a governor" by mobilizing the youth across the country and bypassing the MPs.

The Hukm Sharai on Relations with Other States

With the insurmountable evidence supporting the notions of plotting and interference by foreign embassies and ambassadors in Muslim lands, one may ask what the hukm sharai is regarding relationships between the Islamic state and with other countries. The Islamic State's relations with other states are built upon four considerations:

1. States in the current Islamic world are considered to belong to one state and therefore every effort should be expended to unify all these countries into one state.
2. States that have economic, commercial, friendly or cultural treaties with the Khilafah are to be treated according to the terms of the treaties.
3. States with which we do not have treaties, imperialist states and those states that have designs against the Khilafah are considered to be potentially belligerent states. All precautions must be taken towards them and it would be wrong to establish diplomatic relations with them.
4. With states that are actually belligerent states, a state of war must be taken as the basis for all dispositions with them. They must be dealt with as if a real war existed - with or without an actual armistice - between the Muslims and all their subjects are prevented from entering the State.

With respect to foreign ambassadors in Muslim lands, they are excluded from the rules of Islam being implemented upon them as they would be given diplomatic immunity in their role as an ambassador and for the mission that they were sent. This Islamic opinion is based on the actions of RasulAllah (saw) which is narrated by Abu Wa'il who said:

"This one [Ibnul Nawwaha] and Ibnu Uthal had once come to the Messenger of Allah (saw) as envoys of Musaylima the liar and the Messenger of Allah (saw) said to them: ‘Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah?' They said: ‘We bear witness that Musaylima is the Messenger of Allah.' Upon this the Messenger of Allah(saw): ‘If I were to kill an envoy I would strike your necks.' Since then, a tradition has been established stipulating that the envoy does not get killed." [Ahmad]

This Hadith indicates that it is forbidden to kill the envoys that are dispatched from non-Muslim countries or subject them to any punishment related to their role as envoys. However, this is exclusively applicable upon those who have the capacity of an envoy, such as the ambassador. As for those upon whom the capacity of an envoy does not apply, (i.e. Consul, Commercial Attaché, etc) they would not have immunity because they do not have the capacity of an envoy.

Furthermore, if the foreign ambassadors were to commit actions that go beyond the role of an ambassador such as murdering, stealing, propagating kufr concepts or trying to divide the Ummah, then they would be held accountable and a punishment determined by a judge would be issued upon them.

As for the foreign embassy buildings themselves, they operate today on the premise that the land upon which the buildings exist is a part of their land of origin. In other words, the US embassy in Pakistan for example, will be considered "American soil." This implies that the laws from which the embassy originate will be implemented in that embassy. In the Muslim lands it is haram (forbidden) to have a set of rules or laws that take precedence to Allah's سبحانه وتعالى Hukm

Sharai based on His revelation:

وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
"Those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the Kafiroon." [Al-Maaida, 5:47]

As a result, it is haram to allow such foreign embassies to exist in our lands. The very thought of them should provoke our anger and outrage even more than the thought of bars selling alcohol in Muslim lands. When we read in the news about foreign embassies and ambassadors in our lands, we should remind ourselves of the roles they have played in destroying the Khilafah and the initiatives they currently lead to destroy any semblance of Islam in the Muslim lands. If we have family in the Muslim world that is employed by foreign embassies, we must discuss with them the Hukm Sharai. We should also explain the history and the current context of these embassies and ambassadors so that they will see them for what they really are and be aware of the ploys and tactics that are continually used to inflict damage on the Ummah.

May Allah (swt)allow us to see the truth for what it is and the falsehood for what it is.

تِلْكَ آيَاتُ اللَّهِ نَتْلُوهَا عَلَيْكَ بِالْحَقِّ فَبِأَيِّ حَدِيثٍ بَعْدَ اللَّهِ وَآيَاتِهِ يُؤْمِنُونَ
"These are the Ayat of Allah, which We recite to you with truth. Then in which speech after Allah and His Ayat will they believe?" [Al-Jaathiya, 45:6]

Saturday, June 06, 2009

The way to work for Khilafah

It has today become an indisputable reality that this Ummah yearns for the return of the Islamic Khilafah. She has witnessed much that solidifies this desire. Today, we find that Allah (swt) has brought back the desire in the hearts of the Muslims and this Ummah to return to the rule of Islam. Amongst them are those who are willing to dedicate their time and effort for the service of Islam. This article seeks to explain how such people can work for Islam and work for its noble aims.

Knowledge before action
Hazzam bin Hakeem narrated from his uncle from the Messenger of Allah (saw) who said: “You are in a time of many jurisprudents (fuqaha), few speakers/lecturers, many who give and few who ask; so action in this time is better than knowledge. There will soon come a time of few jurisprudents, many speakers, many who beg and few who give; so knowledge in this time is better than action.”

This noble advice by the Messenger (saw) builds the principle that Islam has always placed knowledge before action. It is saddening to see that amongst some workers for Islam, action comes before knowledge. This is highly dangerous, since we saw at the beginning of the last century a plethora of patriotic movements rising up against the colonialist occupation only to find that when the colonialists left they implemented the same secular models in their lands. Also we find today, under the banner of Islam, some Muslim governments conducting “experiments” for Islamisation, even though the Qur’an and Sunnah showed in detail the Islamic system, and this has been explained in many volumes of books.

Islam has placed knowledge and thinking as a precondition for action, and this ensures that the action undertaken is the correct action and that the action is according to Islam and is the correct action to achieve the aim. But the question may be asked - what type of knowledge is required? Here are a few areas that anyone working for Islam should seek to understand:

i. To gain an understanding of Islam and its basic concepts. These concepts need to start with the Aqa’id (belief) because this is the basis of all correct actions. A Muslim must be convinced of his basis, because under all strong structures lay a strong, solid foundation. We have witnessed, with great sadness, excellent people with much energy working for the goals of Islam one day and then leaving this work the other because their foundations were weak and all they had was zeal and desire rather than sound knowledge.

ii. To understand the Shari’ah rules. Islam has made it an obligation for a Muslim to understand the Hukm Shari’ concerning his actions. So a Muslim must be aware of his obligations. It is incorrect for a Muslim to work for Islam, yet fall short of abiding by the rules of Islam in his personal life. Again we witness with sadness many who openly call out against ‘Western culture’ yet in their own lives are engrossed with its films and music, soaps and trivialities the same West gives them. In understanding the Shari’ah rules, one must make sure he or she does not limit themselves to just a specific area which they are inclined to. Rather Islam needs to be taken completely.

iii. To understand the main points of Kufr. This area is unobvious to many. The Messenger (saw) used to know the thoughts of the Quraish so that he could speak out against them. Also Allah (swt) encouraged this, so in the Qur’an He (swt) points out on many occasions the contradictions that existed with the Mushrikeen. Today the Muslim needs to be aware of the dominant ideology, capitalism, its components and its contradiction with Islam. Again this knowledge requires more than just a superficial understanding such that the call of Islam becomes a general unconvincing call. When Allah (swt) says, "Say 'This is my way: I call to Allah with sure knowledge, I and whosoever follows me. And Glorified and Exalted is Allah. And I am not of the Mushrikeen" [TMQ Yusuf: 108], he commands the knowledge to be precise. Today we need to understand globalisation, democracy, freedom, interfaith dialogue, and secularism amongst many other ideas that are invalid and cannot be adopted by the Muslims.

iv. Knowledge of the correct Islamic work. If a Muslim were to study Islam correctly he would find that Islam has placed the authority as the most essential organ to safeguard the rules of Islam and the Muslims. This necessitates that in the absence of this authority work is required to bring it back. The Khilafah is the only correct structure Islam has laid down, the Messenger (saw) said, “after me there will be no Prophet, but there will be Khulafah and they will number many”. So the correct Islamic work is to call for the Khilafah. That means to work to bring back its return. This work by definition is a political work, and thus requires an aware Islamic political party.

Apart from what has been mentioned above, a Muslim must seek knowledge continuously and must always strive to excel in his or her understanding.

Carrying Da’wa
If a Muslim was to engage in gaining knowledge he would realise quickly that knowledge without action is like a donkey with books on its back. This knowledge would be of no use to the people no matter how much he gained and how much of a faqih he became. Islam has said that the most essential component in carrying Islam and bringing back the Khilafah is to carry Da’wa. That is to invite people. Allah (swt) says, "Invite to the way of your Lord..." [TMQ An-Nahl: 125]. Also Islam has mandated that Da’wa should be carried immediately after knowledge. Never in the history of Islam has a Da’wa carrier stayed at home after being affected by Islam. The stories of the Sahabah (ra) are all an evidence for this. Also the Messenger (saw) said, “Convey from me even if it is one ayah”. The following needs to be kept in mind when carrying Da’wa.

i. Da’wa should be a focused work. The Muslims need to be told in a clear, unambiguous way that the many problems we see are due to the absence of the Khilafah and that Islam demands the Da’wa carrier to discuss this issue. Muslims must expose the plans of the West in our lands, their agents in the form of our leaders and all that stems from their corrupt ideology that distances the Muslims from uniting once again under this strong leadership such as the erroneous concepts of nationalism, pragmatism, gradualism and the like.

ii. A Muslim should not talk about what he does not know. The Messenger (saw) always sought revelation from Allah (swt) before he spoke a word. This forms a general rule that one cannot speak out of ignorance.

iii. Da’wa should be carried purely for the pleasure or Allah (swt). A Da’wa carrier must not seek benefit or position from carrying Da’wa. Rather he must do this purely for the sake of Allah (swt). This principle, that is to carry Da’wa for the pleasure of Allah (swt) if understood, will ensure the Da’wa carrier does not stray from his path and change his argument to suit the people.

iv. When carrying Da’wa nothing should interfere with the correct idea and the conveyance of it. The Messenger (saw) was the best example, and he conveyed this message without allowing egoism or personality into the discussion.

v. The call should be carried without compromise. It is not permissible to change the message in order to please the people or to win a temporary supporter. Rather this call needs to be frank, carried with wisdom, that is using the best of styles but conveying the haq (truth) completely. Furthermore the ideas that are carried must not be reconciled with the Western ideology and its standards. It must rather be derived purely from Islam.

vi. The carrier of the Da’wa must be ready to face the trials and tribulations that those who oppose it will place in his or her path. The only way to prepare for this is to have the clear knowledge of the key Islamic ideas such as al Qadaa wal Qadr, or Rizq (sustenance) being from Allah (swt), or Al-Tawakkul (reliance on Allah [swt]) amongst other ideas. Also they must equip themselves with the knowledge of the previous Prophets (as) and their companions and how they bore hardships and finally they must be close to the Qur’an as there is not any other book but this that has the ability to motivate, inspire and energise.

Working with an Islamic Party
Allah (swt) has made carrying Da’wa Fard upon every Muslim. He (swt) has also obligated upon the community to establish at least one group to call to al-Khair, that is Islam, to enjoin al-Maroof (all that is good) and forbid al-Munkar (all that is evil).

Allah (swt) says in the Qur’an,

“Let there arise from amongst you a band of people, who call to Al-Khair, enjoining al-maroof and forbidding al-munkar. And they are those who will gain success.” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 103]

This ayah obligates the establishment of a group. If one was to study the nature of the task to re-establish the Khilafah one would find that for this work to be effective, there needs to be a collective effort. Furthermore the Messenger (saw) worked with the Sahabah (ra) as a group to change the Kufr society and transform it to an Islamic one.

There are some points to consider before choosing which group or groups are correct to ensure that the action undertaken is one with full awareness. As with all actions, Allah (swt) will account us for obedience to him and so to just choose any group would be impermissible, rather the one or ones that fulfils the obligation pointed out in this noble ayah must be considered. These are the points:

i. This group must call to Islam. Allah (swt) mentions in this ayah the word ‘Al Khair’, which is Islam. So if they were a nationalistic, democratic, capitalistic, socialist group etc… then they would not fulfil the command in this ayah. In fact joining groups who are based upon these foreign ideas or who call for such ideas would be sinful, as to call for these ideas and to gather around them is haram.

ii. This group must call to the vital issue, as defined by Islam. The vital issue today is the re-establishment of the Khilafah. It is the Khilafah that will implement Islam, and without it, it would be impossible for the society to adhere to all of the laws of Islam. By definition, calling for the Khilafah is a political work, as it involves changing the society to establish an authority and removing the present authorities based upon non-Islam. So this group must be a political group or party.

iii. It must have a clear method of affiliation. It has been observed that many groups are tarnished with infighting, strands, wings and the like. This is due to the members of these groups not having a unified aim and sets of ideas. Rather the people are often chosen because they show some sort of enthusiasm to do work regardless of them carrying the same ideas and aims.

iv. The group must have a ‘culturing process’. That is they must have a way of developing newcomers to the group as well as established members. This culturing must be taken seriously and all should need to go through it. This ensures they are built and developed with the Islamic culture, purifying their intentions and thoughts, building their concepts and strengthening their resolve. So the initial zeal and enthusiasm is transferred to a sound knowledge and consistent work. It is saddening to see the many who begin to work for Islam and then stop this work; this can generally be attributed to a lack of culturing with Islam in this group.

v. This group must be clear in its language, and bold in its actions - to enjoin the Maroof and forbid the Munkar requires from the Muslim to challenge all that is wrong and uphold all that is right.

vi. The group must study the reality clearly and comprehensively. Islam mandated that the reality in which the group works must be understood. This includes the study of the thoughts and ideas that exist in society as well as the plots and plans of the Kafiroon and her agent rulers in our lands. To just have a generalised understanding of the reality would not allow the people to understand the true nature of the problem we face.

vii. The group must not look down upon the Ummah nor abuse them for not working with them or not adhering to Islam. Rather it should seek to lift up their spirits, energise them, wake them from their slumber and bring about this change. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Whoever says the people are destroyed are the most destroyed of the people.” [Sahih Muslim].

viii. The group should have a strong atmosphere that gels the members together. This atmosphere must be a pure one and it should be based upon seeking the pleasure of Allah (swt). We witness many groups that exist in the West that are run like a company, where the members have to continuously be forced to undertake actions. This is contrary to the way of Islam where the strength of the idea makes a person willingly want to sacrifice his time and effort. The Messenger of Allah (saw) wrote in a letter to Abdullah Ibn Jahsh, when he sent him to lead an expedition to keep an eye on Quraysh at Nakhlah, between Makkah and Ta’if: “Do not coerce anyone of your companions to proceed with you, and go forth with my order with those who follow you.”

These three points; gaining knowledge, carrying da’wa and working with an Islamic Party would be the practical way to work for Khilafah. So after this, we would say join this work with the sincere ones who seek to achieve the highest place in Jannah. Strengthen your resolve, for the Ummah yearns for change, and this change requires work. May our deeds be multiplied in reward in the eyes of Allah (swt) and may we become the ones who will be the “beloved” to the Messenger (saw)!

The Messenger Muhammad (saw) said:
“Islam began as something strange, and it shall return to being something strange, so give glad tidings to the strangers.” It was asked, "Who are those strangers, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied, “Those that correct the people when they become corrupt.” This is the narration of at-Tabaraani in his al-Kabeer.

Friday, June 05, 2009

Views on the news - 05/06/09

Jim Rogers: Dollar headed for a major crisis

A currency crisis is imminent, so investors should avoid shorting the market, said Jim Rogers, veteran investor and chairman of Rogers Holdings. "I’m afraid they're printing so much money that stocks could go to 20,000 or 30,000," Rogers said. "Of course it would be in worthless money, but it could happen and you could lose a lot of money being short."Rogers called the US dollar a "terribly flawed currency," adding that it could be the starting point for the next currency crisis. "I would suspect that somewhere along the line...someone's going to say, 'I'm going to start selling mine before everybody else does,'" Rogers said. "That's when you have a currency crisis."

Israel determined to scupper Obama’s overtures of peace to Iran

For the first time since 1980, the US has authorised its embassies around the world to invite Iranian diplomats to Independence Day receptions. The move is part of a new policy of engagement with Iran under President Barack Obama's administration. However, Israel is determined to put a stop to Obama’s peace overtures. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in Washington on Wednesday that Israel will keep all options against Iran's any potential threats or attacks. Speaking to reporters after talks with U.S. officials, Barak said: "I repeat what I have always said, we are not taking any options off the table."

Egypt welcomes Obama by closing Sultan Masjid for prayer

Al Arabiyya reported that Muslims could no longer pray at Sultan Hassan masjid after security forces cordoned off the masjid in preparation for U.S. President Barack Obama's trip to Cairo Thursday sparked outrage from the opposition Muslim Brotherhood even as the masjid denied them. The masjid, a historical masjids that dates back to 1348 A.D., is reportedly on Obama's itinerary for his Cairo trip, which will commence in the early afternoon this coming Thursday, following the president's speech at Cairo University and his visit to the American embassy. "This (restricting faithful from praying at masjid) is impermissible in Shariah," brotherhood member, Muhsen Radi, told Al Arabiya. "Egypt's security service has cordoned the whole area around the masjid and has told businesses nearby to close on Wednesday and Thursday."

Baghdad: US embassy promotes homosexuality

Last month The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad held its first ever gay part. The invitation described the event as "the first-ever U.S. Embassy Gay Pride Theme Party". The event was organized and sponsored by a group of employees. Given the lack of places to meet in Baghdad, the embassy allows groups to use its social facilities for events on a first-come, first-served basis." The invitation said, "Prizes will be awarded for two contests: Best Dressed Gay Icon and Best Lip Synch Performance.”
After having brutality terrorised the Muslims of Iraq through mass killings, rape and torture, the US is now rewarding the country with the promotion of homosexuality. America is determined to strip the Muslims of Iraq of their Islamic identity and replace it with its decrepit values.

Obama’s speech- Another endorsement of America’s war against Islam

By his own admission, Obama said,”No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust.” And by Obama’s own actions his policy towards the Muslim world is no different than the course charted by his predecessor-President Bush. Obama has not lifted a single finger to protect the rights of the Palestinians from the aggressions of the Zionists. Obama continues to wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan. More recently he has expanded America’s war into Pakistan and is looking to invade Somalia and Sudan. His support of tyrants like Mubarak and King Abdullah belittles the very values he espouses for the Muslim world. Despite all of this, he still has the audacity to think that by speaking about his dubious Muslim past he can win over the hearts and minds of millions of Muslims world-wide. Obama represents nothing more than the arrogance of receding super power that is desperately trying to placate the Muslim world in order to ensure that its precious material interests are not undermined.

Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world

Speaking on ABC radio PM programme, Lieutenant Colonel Kilcullen, a former theorist of asymmetrical warfare in the Australian Army and a senior advisor US General Petraeus , said that while the international focus has shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan, Pakistan is central to security concerns within in the region. "I think it's not an exaggeration to say that Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world today," he said. "In certainly in terms of counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency problems, it is the problem that most worries me and I think that should most worry Western policy makers. Pakistan is a very developed country, there's a Pakistani Diaspora across most other countries in Europe and North and South America and it has more than 100 nuclear weapons," he said."The government is progressively losing control of its own population and territory. And you've got Al Qaeda sitting right in the middle of the country so it's a very, very significant problem." The counter-insurgency expert says the problems in Pakistan are compounded by a lack of direct access and diverging priorities within the Pakistani security agencies. "We don't have a lot of ability to influence the situation in Pakistan and frankly there are elements in the Pakistani military and intelligence services who are on the other side," he said. "I think that the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] has a history of using militant extremist organisations as an unconventional counterweight to Indian regional influence and most members of the Pakistani national security establishment tend to regard the real threat to Pakistan as India, not extremist militancy."

5/6/09

"I am free to do what I want"

In this society, many of us really believe we are free to do what we want with our lives. And being a teenager or young adult, brings with it a whole different perspective. Soon as we enter into the world of being a young person in this society, we are tempted to take on a whole outlook on the way we live life. Whether its going out to clubs and pubs, looking for no-strings-attached romance or being typically rebellious with family and authority; the attitude of just living by whatever takes ones fancy or gives one pleasure is a common one for teenagers.

In Western society, the youth have created as well as have been pushed into a niche where responsibility is a far concern as seeking pleasures is the only concern. Thus being sexually active without responsibility has grave consequences – Alfie Patten, the 13 year old who became a father was a shocking example of this. This is no surprise as a survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International in 2005 revealed that in the US, 27% 13 to 16 year olds and 41% of 14 to 15 year olds are sexually active. It is therefore no surprise that teenage pregnancies are a significant problem in the West, with the US and Britain having the highest rates.

Although the attitude of doing as one pleases exists in the West, the reality is that we live in a society, not in isolation. Therefore although some of us may interprete freedom in our lives as just trying to get a good job, have a decent career and start a stable family to make ourselves happy, another person may interprete this freedom in a totally different way. So making oneself happy for a rapist has a lot more of a disasterous consequence, although they have acted upon the same idea that we ourselves hold - the freedom to please ourselves. So if we really believe we all should be allowed to exercise our own freedoms as we live quite a decent and righteous life, then we should not have a problem with a rapist existing in our society too, who also has exercised his freedom.

Are you really free?

This is the question which many of us living in Western societies assume the answer to. However if we really ask ourselves this question we will find the answer to be in the negative. We are not at all really free. Although society promotes sexual freedom to satisfy ones desires, the British law requires that you must be above the age of 16 to do so. Although we believe we are free to dress in whatever way we please, be it a sack even if we chose, the reality is if you decided to walk down the street stark naked, you would be arrested. If you asked a newspaper to report some type of abuse about the Queen you would be told that it was not allowed.

Therefore it is clear we are not at all totally free – We are just free to the extent that society and the Government allow you to be. Therefore the question then begs, that if we are not free, but all live by a set of norms and rules, then what rules should we be following? The norms of a society which human beings have decided for themselves, or the norms and rules of the Creator who created our very bodies and souls?

Freedom causes you to think only about yourself

The desire to exercise their desires before anything else, damn any responsibility naturally fuels a certain mentality within young people. The endless quest to make oneself happy, makes people put their own desires first, above anyone elses.

The idea of individualism in society causes young people to just have fun without limits, without thinking about the impact on other people or on society. Individualism gives boys the licence to do behave sexually in whatever way they please, but never intend to commit to the girl they are intimate with. Individualism means a superficial desire of always wanting a pretty size 8 girlfriend, as a woman on a BBC reality TV show about single mothers disclosed, that her partner left her whilst she was 5 months pregnant because he felt she lost her ‘looks’. Individualism means parents who prioiritised their own career success or love life over the wellbeing of their children, as reported by the 2009 Children’s Society report; which has resulted in children being more anxious and unhappy.

The panel which produced the 2009 Children’s society report stated that the current ‘excessive individualism needs to be replaced by a value system where people seek satisfaction more from helping others rather than pursuing private advantage’.

Western societies breed the idea of individualism as an idea people live by in society and you are told it does not matter how your actions affect others – if you are fine that’s all the matters. However this is not at all true as everything people do in society affects others – If a man is intimate with a woman and gets her pregnant and then does a runner, he not only affects the life of the woman who has to survive and bring up a child and fend for herself alone, but he also affects the life of the baby who grows up without having a father figure. Actions by individuals affects society, and this is the idea that must be understood by Western society for it to deal with the current social breakdown that is being witnessed in society.

Islam cares about others around you

There is a Hadith reported in Bukhari, narrated by Nu'man bin Basheer (ra) that the Prophet (saw) said,

"The example of the one who stands for the Deen of Allah and the one who has left it are like the people in a boat, some of whom occupy the upper deck and some occupy the lower deck. Whenever those in the lower deck need water, they have to go to the upper deck to retrieve it. So some of them said, ‘why don't we make a hole in our deck so we do not harm the people of the upper deck?' If the people do not stop them, they will all fall and be failures, but if they stop them they will all be saved"

The Prophet SAW is here aliking the example of the situation of people needing to work together to keep a ship afloat, like people in society – If people just seek to fulfil their own needs and desires without thinking about everyone else, then eventually they will all sink. Islam therefore necessitates that we think about the community and society, as well as our own selves. Under the Islamic Khilafah, the social system of Islam necessitates that the agitation of the sexual instinct is totally removed from society, so that the society and community are protected from the ravages of unrestricted promiscuity which occur as a result of unrestricted freedom.

The Prophet (saw) said:
‘Oh you youngsters. Whoever amongst you who can afford to marry should marry, because it will help him more to lower his gaze and guard his modesty (i.e.chastity). And whoever is not able to marry he should fast, because it will be a protection for him’ (Bukhari and Muslim).

The stability and commitment of marriage is the place for the satisfaction of this instinct, so that it is not let loose in society.

We are slaves of Allah

The idea that we are free to do whatever we want and fulfil are desires in whatever way we want, is a total fallacy. If we have no freedom over the number of times our heart beats, how many electric impulses our brain sends and how much oxygen our lungs intake, how can we possibly believe that we are free to fulfil the needs and desires of our body in other respects, as discussed above? Clearly we have been created by Allah and are being kept alive by Allah, so how can we have the audacity to believe that when it comes to the areas of our needs where we have a choice, that Allah has no room to tell us what to do?
Rather Allah swt has clearly told us in the Holy-Qur'an,
وَمَا خَلَقْتُ الْجِنَّ وَالْإِنْسَ إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُونِ
‘I have created jinn and man for no reason but to worship me’. (TMQ51-55)

This makes clear that whether it is the involuntary or ivoluntary needs and desires, everything we do must be in line with what Allah loves, and abstaining from whatever Allah hates, as our very purpose in this world, is for Him.

The Prophet (saw) narrated in a hadith,
‘Any action not based upon our affair will be rejected.’
Therefore there is no room for a Muslim to feel that he has the freedom to choose however to fulfil his desires – Every single action he does must be in line with Islam. This does not mean that a Muslim must pray and fast 24 hours a day and nothing else, but it just means that in the way we have relationships with people, how we buy and sell, how we behave with our parents, where we go in our free-time, must all be in line with the deen of Allah.

This is because as Muslims we know that death is the most definite thing and that after death the Day of Judgement will inevitably come, where we must answer for every single deed that we carried out in this world. This will be the Day when,
فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ (7) وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ شَرًّا يَرَهُ (8
‘he who has done an atom's weight of good shall see it ,And he who has done an atom's weight of evil shall see it.’ (surah Zalzalah 7-8)

Thus knowing that Allah will account us for even the smallest error we make in arrogance defying his deen, should make us people who use our minds to always think before we act. The behaviour of doing as we please, damn consequences and whether it is right or wrong, is never for the thinking, mature Muslim.

The thinking, mature Muslim has taqwa, fear and consciousness of his Creator, which ignites within him a desire to continuously remember his Lord in everything he does, so even if she wants to freemix and join in with the other girls with their flirting and college romances, her fear and love for Allah far exceeds her small and human desires.

She remembers that Allah’s promise of the great reward of the Hereafter which will satisfy ones desires beyond imagination, is the best reward to wait for:
وَمَنْ يَتَّقِ اللَّهَ يُكَفِّرْ عَنْهُ سَيِّئَاتِهِ وَيُعْظِمْ لَهُ أَجْرًا
"And whoever fears Allah, and keeps his duty to Him, He will forgive his sins from him and will enlarge his reward." [TMQ At-Talaq 65:5]

Indeed, life in this society is extremely difficult to withstand for the Muslim youth, as they are constantly forced into submitting to their lowly human desires and seek their own benefit. But a Muslim knows that this is simply the path to destruction, in this life and the Hereafter and for the community around them. With the help of their Creator, therefore they are able to seek the higher ground for actions and live purely for Allah over the base desires of human beings:
الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا وَكَانُوا يَتَّقُونَ (63) لَهُمُ الْبُشْرَى فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَفِي الْآَخِرَةِ لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِكَلِمَاتِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ هُوَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ
‘Those who believe and constantly guard against evil, for them are glad tidings in the life of the present and in the Hereafter, no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity.’ (Surah Yunus 63-64)