Wednesday, April 28, 2010

How will the US-Russian rivalry affect Ukraine in the coming era ?

Question:

 The second phase of the presidential elections was held in Ukraine on 2nd February, 2010. In the first phase of the polls, Victor Yusichenko, who had come to power in the wake of the ‘Orange Revolution', bagged merely 5% of the votes and in the second phase, he was unable to compete. While Yanukovych and Tymoshenko won 35% and 25% of the votes in the first phase and entered the second round. Indeed Victor Yanukovych who is pro-Russia and has served earlier as Prime Minister and also as President in 2004 polled 48% of the votes in the second round against his rival Tymoshenko who bagged 46% of votes, and thus he has again become the president of the republic. Does this mean the end of the era of the ‘Orange Revolution' and return of Ukraine in the Russian lobby? How will the US-Russian rivalry affect Ukraine in the coming era?
Answer:

1. As is known that the ‘Orange Revolution' was ushered after the 2004 elections which led to the downfall of Yanukovych from power and shaped the pro-West alliance of Yushichenko and Yulia Tymoshenko which resulted in increased tension Russia and the West represented by the US and Europe and both the parties organized campaigns against each other. However Yusichenko further heightened the tension during his rule between Ukraine and Russia through his attempts to bring Ukraine into the NATO fold, his statements regarding expulsion of the Russian Black Sea fleet from the Crimean peninsula as well as his attempts to forge strong ties with Saakashvili of Georgia and his pursuing a policy of eternal conflict with Russia in every field...especially in the energy and security matters. Thus Yusichenko was not able to realize widespread popular support especially with regard to his national programme which he himself described as programme of conflict with Russia.

As against this, Russia used the Compressed Natural Gas card to project Yusichenko as an unwanted person in front of his people. Russia threatened Ukraine with cutting off gas supplies or increase in the gas prices during the last two years and especially during the severe winter months. And thus the threatened people of Ukraine realized that pro-Western stance is not the solution....

On the other hand, as a result of the International Economic Crisis, Ukraine was plunged into continuous political and economic instability wherein parliamentary elections were held twice and five governments were changed...All these factors prepared grounds against Yusichenko in the presidential elections and resulted in the victory of pro-RussianYanukovych.

2. Ukraine, which has an area of 603.700 Sq. Kms and a population of 48 million, occupies a strategic position on the Black Sea and has energy routes passing through it, especially the natural gas pipelines. In addition to it, it is strategically positioned to link Europe with Asia and thus it can influence the global situation as well as the regional balance. Therefore, both Russia, the US as well as Europe Union countries ascribe a place of importance to Ukraine.

3. As for Ukraine's Strategic Importance to Russia is concerned; Russia attached great importance to it because a vast majority of the eastern Ukraine are Catholics and speak Russian language. Apart from it, the Russian Black Sea fleet is stationed in Ukraine under an agreement which is valid until 2017 C.E.

After the ‘Orange Revolution' in Ukraine in 2004, relations with Russia worsened due to Ukraine's attempts to enter the European Union and also because of Ukraine stand on the Russian Black Sea fleet anchored in Sevastopol as well as their differences on the natural gas.

Therefore Russia made huge efforts to create an atmosphere against the rule Yusichenko especially in the eastern regions of Ukraine and other pro-Russian regions of Ukraine...Thus it was successful in bringing a pro-Russian government in the elections in Ukraine. Russia heaved a sigh of relief and as soon as Yanukovych ascended to power, he signed a number of agreements with Moscow in the energy sector and consolidated economic cooperation between them proceeded to develop relations in the fields of journalism, publishing and education language and culture. Yasuchenko indicated to the possibility of reaching a new agreement on the issue of the Russian Black Sea fleet in exchange for reduction in the natural gas prices. He said, as reported by the website (www.haberrus.com) on 6th March, 2010, saying: "The problem concerning the issue of Russian Black Sea fleet can be solved in such a way so as to safeguard the interests of both Russia and Ukraine." On the other hand, Ukraine strategically situated on the Black Sea through which also pass energy routes and links Europe with Asia is eternally the cynosure of Russian eyes.
4. As for Ukraine's Strategic Importance to the United States; it is vitally important for the US which is attempting to encircle the Russian influence region. Therefore America's loss of influence in Ukraine would mean strengthening of Russian influence in the Black Sea and Eastern Europe. However, we have seen how the US did all that it could do during the ‘Orange Revolution' which brought Yushenko to power and during that period Ukraine became the main strategic partner of the United States which provided it with economic assistance to the extent that it became the third largest recipient of US aid after (Israel) and Egypt on the list of US aid recipient states. This was meant to sever Ukraine's economic dependence on Russia... However, in the wake of the economic crisis, the US especially because it is caught in the Iraq and Afghanistan quagmire, could not focus enough attention to the opportunities that lay in Ukraine, and this helped Russia to easily exert its influence to destabilise the ‘Orange Revolution'.

5. As for Ukraine's Strategic Importance to the European Union, it sees Ukraine as the dividing line between Russia and the eastern Europe through which Europe's 80% of natural gases flow from Russia which represents some 25% of Europe's gas consumption, and therefore the EU attaches significant importance to Ukraine. After the inclusion of Poland into the EU and Bulgaria & Romania became eligible for EU membership, Ukraine has become EU's very important neighbour. The EU on one hand, views Ukraine as the bridge between Russia and Europe, and on the other hand considers it as the buffer region between itself and Russia.

6. Thus Ukraine's importance to these countries made them take keen interest in the recent elections there...however an observer of the election process can notice that Yanukovych achieved his success by a margin of merely 3% of votes, and this reflects that the political atmosphere has not changed much from earlier times. Therefore, despite pro-West Victor Yushenko's defeat as the president of the republic and coming to power of pro-Russia Yasuchenko as President, it is rather too early to say that the era of the ‘Orange Revolution' has come to an end and that Ukraine has come full circle into the Russian stronghold. This is because Yasuchenko has won by a very slender margin which means that the pro-West popular base still has its pockets of strength intact in Ukraine. This also implies that the Russian-US rivalry in Ukraine will continue.

7. Indeed, Yanukovych realises this well and this is why despite his pro-Russian stance, he first visited Brussels instead of Moscow in an attempt to gain Europe's attention and reduce the focus from his Russian loyalty, especially because his margin of victory was so narrow. This is also because Yanukovych does not want to retrace his earlier path which he followed after the 2004 elections when the people came out on the streets and dethroned him from power. Therefore it is expected of him to follow an approached that is apparently balanced between Russia and the West and cover his policies in such a way so as not to provoke either the US or the EU. However, he will pursue policies inclined towards Russia. Sergey Taran of the International Institute for Democracy pointed this out in a statement in Kiev which was reported by the BBC's Turkey website on 8th February, 2010, he said: "The broad outline of Yanikovych's rule are clear, he will improve Ukraine's relations with the Kremlin, dispel notions regarding Ukraine's membership of the NATO alliance and will work to extend the agreement regarding the stationing of the Russian Black Sea fleet present in the Crimean peninsula which is about to expire in 2017."

The West no doubt is aware of Yanikovych's Russian loyalties and realises that pursuing confrontational approach with him will not be feasible. Instead it will pursue a policy that is apparently closer but covertly adopting such an approach that places obstacles in his path. This is why the US ‘congratulated' him on his victory just like the European Union did...

Despite all this, the conflict between the West, especially the US and Russia regarding Ukraine will not cease because Ukraine occupies such importance. The base of all the parties in Ukraine is substantial and the victory margin in the election was so meager at just 3%, which means that both the parties have effective strengths in Ukraine.

04 Rabi' I 1431
2010/03/20

Quebec's Niqab Ban: What will be next?

The incidents that began with the expulsion of a Muslim sister from a French language course have now escalated to the Quebec government barring Muslims wearing the niqab from obtaining provincial services. The ban is politically opportunistic, pressures Muslims to abandon some of the Ahkam of Islam, and paints the Muslims as foreigners. In terms of voicing our opposition to this ban, we must do so intellectually and on the basis of Islam even when calling on the wider Canadian society to stop this ban.


Last month, the Quebec government tabled Bill-94. According to the Canadian Press, the bill says that "people obtaining - or delivering - services at places like the health- or auto-insurance boards will need to do so with their faces in plain view". The bill has been widely reported as the "niqab ban". In a press conference regarding the bill, Jean Charest, the premier of the Province of Quebec, stated: "Two words: Uncovered face". He also defended the bill on the "principle of equality between men and women, and the religious neutrality of the state". The Canadian Press also reported that Salam Elmenyawi of the MCM questioned the need to legislate against such a small minority of the population. "It is a knee-jerk reaction to the opposition and vote-grabbing more than anything else".
Niqab Ban: Political Opportunism

This move by the Quebec government imitates that of France. In January of this year, France banned the wearing of the burka while receiving assistance from any public services such as hospitals, schools and public transportation. Charest's motives are being questioned and are being seen as political opportunism as only 10 people out of 118,000 visitors to the health board's Montreal office in 2008-09 wore the niqab. As noted in the Canadian press this is only 0.00009% of all cases!

Given the current economic crisis that is gripping the world, including the province of Quebec - whose gross debt is 50% of its GDP; the highest ratio of all the provinces - why is the government focused on a bill that targets hardly anyone?

With respect to political opportunism, the Globe and Mail reported that the ban granted Charest "his first round of positive press in a very long time" - referring to the political backlash he has received over "his handling of the ongoing debate in Quebec over the limits of reasonable accommodation". Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff, leader of the federal Liberal party, both have noted their support for the ban.

This race to the bottom is endemic in democratic countries. In Europe, politicians shifted to the right, in an effort to appease the racist shift in societal attitudes. In Denmark, during the 2002 elections, the right-wing Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People's Party) was distributing leaflets that had pictures of a young blonde girl with the byline: "By the time she retires there will be a Muslim majority in Denmark". Such a leaflet was designed to provoke fear about the Muslims - who only make up 2% of the population. As it turns out, the Danish political party, that was in power at the time of the printing of the cartoons insulting the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, was dependent on Dansk Folkeparti for political survival. So is it any surprise that the Danish Prime Minister at the time (Anders Fogh Rasmussen) supported the printing of the insulting cartoons as a "necessary provocation"? This is the sad reality of democratic politics.
Fitnah: The Pressure to Abandon Islam
The other aspect of the niqab ban is to make Muslims compromise in their Deen. Commentators on the matter have taken issue with the Muslim sister because she refused to compromise. As Allah سبحانه وتعالى revealed:

وَدُّوا لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ

"They wish that you should compromise (in religion out of courtesy) with them, so they (too) would compromise with you." [Al-Qalam, 68:9]

Again, Quebec is not alone in this tactic of making Muslims compromise in their Deen. In France, the hijab is banned. In Ireland Muslim male applicants for post-nuptial citizenship have to sign a sworn affidavit that they will not take a second wife in the future. In Holland, predominantly Muslim immigrants must watch a video with scenes of nudity and homosexuality before they are granted citizenship.

Demonizing Muslims: Part of the War on Islam

Since 2001, the G8 Nations have increased their military presence in the Muslim world. Canada is assisting the American forces to occupy Afghanistan. The bans in Quebec, France, Holland, Belgium are a way of giving the impression that the customs of Muslims are so "backward" and that these nations have a "civilizational" duty to bring "enlightenment" to us. The problem for the Canadian Capitalist elite is about how to sell this war to the Canadian public - who pride themselves on their tradition as peace keepers. Canadian diplomat, Robert Fowler, noted this issue when he stated: "We are simply not prepared to foot the massive price in blood and treasure which it would take to effectively colonize Afghanistan ... and replace their culture with ours, for that seems to be what we seek."
What will be Banned Next?

The danger of the niqab ban is the precedence that it will set. As it has happened in Europe, the opportunistic politicians attack and create laws that limit one aspect of Islam, which leads them to become emboldened and even more aggressive in their attack on Islam and Muslims. For example, in Belgium politicians first banned hijabs in schools. Now the Belgian government is on its way to ban the burqa outright -meaning no Muslimah can wear the burqa anywhere in the country. Similarly, the French government first banned the hijab in government buildings and now they are trying to ban the burqa as well.

Consequently, Muslims must recognize that this bill is not simply about the face covering. It is an attack on Islam, which will set the stage for further restrictions on Muslim men and women. What will be next? Will the hijab and jilbab be banned? Will Muslims be told to shave their beards? Will we be prevented from praying in public places? If the opportunistic politicians succeed in banning the niqab under such pretenses, then they can justify similar legislation against the Islamic dress, the beard, and the salat.

As a result, all Muslim men and women should be concerned about this issue and intellectually express their disagreement with the bill.
Canadian Society: Moving towards Intolerance?

Although the niqab ban may bring political gains to the Liberal party in Quebec, it will do so at a great cost to the overall society in Quebec, and Canada. The Canadians pride themselves on having an open society, but with the passage of the bill we can expect greater tensions within society. As reported in the CBC, Fo Niemi, director of the Centre for Research Action on Race Relations, points out that the ban on the niqab not only has implications on Muslims, but also sets a precedent for all minorities. He noted "Today it is the niqab, tomorrow it could be the hijab the day after that it could be the Sikh turban ... and then afterwards ... how far we go? Will we even go to the point that we withdraw funding from the Jewish hospital or require that the Jewish hospital remove its Jewishness because the state shall not fund or support religious expression?"
How to raise this issue with the wider society?

As Muslims, we cannot be silent about this issue. Also, it is an issue that impacts the fabric of Canadian society: it is something that the wider Canadian society should be concerned about. So, how should we discuss the issue?

Most importantly, we must discuss this matter on the basis of Islam alone. It is wrong to discuss on the basis of freedom and human rights, as these ideas do not emanate from the Islamic Aqeedah. Furthermore, these same principles are the basis upon which attacks are launched against Islam. The printing of the cartoons that insulted RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم or allowing right-wing personalities to speak at Canadian universities to spew out their hatred towards Muslims and Islam - are all justified by freedom of speech. As a result, when Muslims champion freedoms when it comes to issues to protect Islam and then call for its curtailment when it comes to attacking Islam - people may view this as contradictory and hypocritical. More importantly, the only Deen before Allah سبحانه وتعالى is Islam and not the "deen of freedom". Iraq and Afghanistan are justified in the name of freedom - what has it brought except ruin to the people? Senator Phil Graham, and the US congress, deregulated the banks in the name of freedom and they proceeded to destroy the world economy through the issuance of sub-prime backed bonds. The industries pollute the air, seas, and land in the name of free market. It is wrong, therefore, to call for these ideas and call for their implementation as Allah سبحانه وتعالى has prescribed Islam for humanity.

Following the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم in times of Difficulty

In these difficult times we should reflect on how RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم taught the Sahabah (ra) to deal with such situations. RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم allowed the Sahabah to immigrate to Abyssinia to live under the safety and hospitality of the ruler, an-Najashi. Once Quraish heard about this, they sent Amr ibn al-'As ibn Wa'il and ‘Abdullah ibn Rabi'ah to persuade an-Najashi to hand the Muslims back. Initially, they failed to convince him. However, the next day ‘Amr ibn al-'As went back to an-Najashi and said to him, "The Muslims say dreadful things about ‘Isa, son of Maryam, send for them and ask them about it." Jaafar ibn Abi Talib (ra) responded on behalf of the Muslims. Before examining his response, we must remember how severe the torture was upon the Sahabah (ra) in Makkah. For example, the mushrikeen of Quraish used to place hot coals on the back of Khabbab ibn Al-Aratt (ra) until he could smell his own fat burn. In other words, the risks were high: if Jaafar (ra) failed to convince the ruler of Absynnia, it would have meant that the Sahabah would be heading back to this type of severe oppression. So what did Jaafar say, when he was asked about Isa (as)? He said: "We say about him that which our Prophet brought, saying, he is the slave of Allah and His Messenger, and His spirit, and His word, which He cast into Maryam the blessed virgin." In other words, he (ra) answered based on what RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم taught him. He clearly mentioned that Isa (as) was a slave of Allah سبحانه وتعالى - even though the Christians consider him, naouthubillah, the son of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. Also, the Sahabah refused to bow to An-Najashi, even though it was the custom of the society. Similarly, we must only answer based on what Islam says and not compromise on how we speak to the wider Canadian society.

In Jaafar's speech, Jaafar also told an-Najishi the following:

"When they treated us with violence and persecution, besieged us, and prevented us from performing our religion, we left for your country and chose you above all others. We desired your hospitality and hoped we would not be harmed in your domain, O King." [Ibn Ishaq]

The Muslim community, through Muslims organizations, associations and the Masajid, need to approach Canadian civil society, including unions, womens' organizations, and other groups who assist the oppressed, with the following message: targeting the Muslim community and its Deen is going to lead to the isolation of our community, increase the tensions between the different communities and undermine the reputation of Canada as a hospitable land. The consequences are dire and far reaching.

Ultimately, As long as we are not living under the shade of the Khilafah we will remain under the threat of a ban like the one in Quebec. Man made legislation is subject to the whims and contradictions of the human mind. May Allah سبحانه وتعالى protect us and enable us to practice our deen. Ameen.

فَإِنَّ مَعَ الْعُسْرِ يُسْرًا
إِنَّ مَعَ الْعُسْرِ يُسْرًا

"Verily, along with every hardship is relief, verily, along with hardship is relief." [Al-Inshira, 94:5-6]

Monday, April 26, 2010

Britain's Forged Role in the World

This article is written by Brother Adnan Khan Last week Britain's three political parties clashed over the nation's role in the world. The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), which represents the views of one of the most influential bodies in Britain, found 88% of its members comprising of diplomats, defence and academic analysts, that the UK needs "a radical reassessment of the position it wants, and is able, to play in the world."


Britain's foreign policy and role in the world usually centres on nuclear weapons, terrorism and the special relationship with the US. However in reality Britain's global interests revolve around another set of ideals, colonialism, expediency and hyperbole which successive governments have constantly pursued.

World War Two consumed Britain to such an extent that it brought an end to the British Empire and its international standing. In the post war era, British global aims were restricted by its economic realities. For this reason Britain worked and continues to have a role in the world by partaking in global issues, however it is unable to completely shift the global balance of power. Newsweek said in 2008 "The photographs of Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill at the Yalta Conference in February 1945 are somewhat misleading. There was no 'big three' at Yalta. There was a 'big two' plus one brilliant political entrepreneur who was able to keep himself and his country in the game, so that Britain maintained many elements of great powerdom well into the late 20th century."

British foreign policy today is built upon having a role in Europe and influencing the US. British policy makers have accepted the nation's weakness after WW2 and developed a policy of preservation rather then direct competition with the US. Britain has managed to achieve its interests through a policy of preserving its global ambitions by working with the US and the EU, whilst at the same time working to divert, alter, complicate and limit the aims of both.

Britain frustrated US plans by rescuing Gaddafi's government from the clutches of American neoconservatives who after September 11 wanted regime change in Libya. Britain also managed to delay the Iraq war by forcing the US to go through the United Nations weakening the US considerably who then went against international law. At the same time Britain worked with the US on the two-state solution in Palestine, on Iran's nuclear enrichment programme and the North Korea issue, but worked against US aims in partnership with Europe in Sudan and Lebanon.

Whether David Cameron or Gordon Brown takes office on May 7th Britain is faced with many facts that it will have to contend with, leaving little ability to manoeuvre. In Iraq the March 2010 elections has not institutionalised the allied constructed political set-up. The various deals the allied forces cut to establish its political solution to Iraq has only remained intact due to allied forces (overwhelmingly American) being present in Iraq. The post election situation is fast descending into chaos as the various factions have found post election Iraq unpalatable. Iraq most certainly is not stabilised.

In Afghanistan the UK has played an ominous role. After eight years of war the western allies are no closer to defeating the Taliban. Whilst all those with interests in Afghanistan met in London to hammer out a deal to entice the Taliban with offers of government positions, Britain appears to have complicated America's presence in South Afghanistan where most of the fighting still continues. The Helmand province where British troops are stationed is still not secure after all these years. It is well known Britain has cut deals with the Taliban in the South and research by the independent Afghanistan Analysts Network, a Kabul-based thinktank, in a report, titled Golden Surrender, was highly critical of the British-backed Peace and Reconciliation Scheme (PTS), established in 2005, which it says has been left to flounder under bad leadership with neither the political nor the financial capital it required.

Whilst the Greek debt crisis once again exposed how fragmented the European Union is, both Labour and the Conservatives view complete isolationism from the EU as unrealistic. Europe is too close and too large to be simply ignored. However the two political parties have divergent views on the EU. The Labour party believe that through engagement London can influence the EU's development and the ultimate direction of its policies. It is not opposed to a European political union, as long as London does not turn into Luxemburg and melt into the EU; it wants a prominent seat at the table of such a union. The Tories on the other hand are for engaging Europe in order to control it. The EU's emphasis on the free movement of goods, capital and people removes government-imposed trade barriers on the free market, which gives Britain's economy an advantage in many fields - it gives Britain's dominant financial sector access to foreign markets. However the Conservatives do not want Britain's big government to be replaced by Brussels. This can only be achieved by ensuring a powerful Europe doesn't become functional.

Whilst Britain's nuclear deterrent continues to be the lens through which the nation's foreign policy is viewed. Britain's nuclear weapons whether the missiles, warheads, switches and factories have all been sold to the US. Whoever comes to power on May 7th will face the prospect of a resurgent Russia and both Iraq and Afghanistan becoming ever more complex. Britain will also face the prospect of both Germany and France further entrenching themselves into Europe after the Lisbon treaty, shaping the EU in their interests. Britain will continue to work with the US in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan and continue to alter and complicate US plans in order to keep strengthening itself. This dual sometimes contradictory approach is how Britain keeps itself relevant in international politics. This is what Britain has resigned its role to in international politics; it no longer has the propensity to achieve anything more substantial.

Monday, April 19, 2010

The Plight of Aafia Siddiqui

By now the whole world is aware of the plight of Aafia Siddiqui, the Pakistani neuroscientist who was arrested in Ghazni province in Afghanistan. She was apparently found with documents describing US landmarks and a number of containers containing chemical substances. She now faces life imprisonment on false charges of attempted murder against her interrogators, but nothing on the terrorism charges she was originally suspected of.


Aafia Siddiqui was picked up in Karachi by Pakistani intelligence in March 2003 together with her 3 children, and remained in obscurity until July 2008 when she was arrested in Ghazni province. Both U.S and Pakistani govt officials deny any knowledge of her whereabouts for the previous 5 years, however during this time the FBI had her on a list of 7 most wanted Al Qaeda fugitives. It has since come to light that Aafia Siddiqui is the infamous prisoner 650 that was tortured and raped in Bagram jail.

It is clear that her disappearance was due to the demands put on Pakistan by America. In fact ever since Pakistan joined the US war on terror in 2001, there has been an ever increasing one-sided “cooperation” between the two countries, which has resulted in Pakistan effectively giving up its sovereignty. What else can describe the situation in a nation where one of its most valued and highly educated citizens like Aafia Siddiqui can simply be picked up off the street and go missing for years? And more indicative would be the complete silence by the Pakistani government, when such a kidnapped citizen ends up paraded in a foreign court of a supposed ally!

Aafia siddique is not the first case however of Pakistan capitulating when one of its citizens has faced accusations from America. There is the case of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan’s nuclear program who was accused by America of nuclear proliferation. Rather than defending him, President Musharraf ended up humiliating him by making him give an apology on national television for his “crime” of selling nuclear secrets to North Korea, Libya and Iran. He was then held under house arrest from 2004 till 2009 when restrictions were lifted. In an interview with ABC news in 2008 he stated that he was “forced into confessing” by President Musharraf who used him as a scapegoat in the national interest. This is how the government of Pakistan treats someone who is a national icon and hero to millions, who has been awarded Pakistan’s highest civilian awards of “Hilal e Imtiaz” and “Nishan e Haider” and has helped the country develop weapons which have given it the status of most powerful Muslim country.

It must be noted that in order to please foreign masters, Pakistan has ended up handing over and humiliating those citizens who are amongst the intellectuals of the country, those who have a hand in its development and progression. If the Pakistani government is unable to defend its pride and glory without so much as an objection, then how can it protect the millions of other citizens it claims to represent? Currently there are 500 “reported” people that have gone missing in Pakistan, and probably many more who have never made it as a written statistic.

Could anyone ever imagine Britain or America giving up any of their own citizens, much less their politicians, doctors, scientists or soldiers? It is more likely that they would engage in extensive diplomatic or even military efforts in order to protect their citizens, nor would they humiliate those who have helped in the development of their countries as they are indispensable for them. And it is not just the protection they afford to their citizens whilst at home. How often is it reported that western tourists are caught foul of the law in so many nations, only to have their sentences commuted or pardoned due to the pressure applied by their governments?

Its not just the examples of Aafia Siddique and Abdul Qadeer Khan that prove just how bankrupt is the claim by the likes of Musharraf and Zardari to be sovereign leaders. Add to this the almost total freedom given to the US to conduct drone attacks within Pakistan, or by allowing thousands of Blackwater mercenary personnel to roam free in the country and do as they please. The government also accepted the Kerry-Lugar bill through which the US has bought access for its security agencies to operate inside of Pakistan, whilst the Pakistani government agrees to provide the US forces with ammunition being used against its own citizens.

Any true sovereign nation, or any leader with an ounce of dignity or self respect, would have stopped cooperating with America in order to bring Aafia Siddiqui back. They would have stopped providing them with fuel or supply routes, closed their embassy, expelled their staff and finally kicked them out of the region. Unfortunately this is too much to ask from Pakistan’s incompetent leaders or any other rulers in the Muslim world. It’s not even a new scenario, since Pakistan was used even before 911 with General Zia being used as a proxy in order to help America remove Russia from Afghanistan. Nawaz Sharif even pulled back the Pakistan army when they were on the verge of victory over India during the 1999 Kargil conflict on the orders of President Bill Clinton.

Sovereignty for Islam is as absent today in Pakistan as it is anywhere else in the Muslim world. How many of our rulers have competed with each other to please America by agreeing to trade Palestine to Israel? How many leaders have welcomed American bases in Muslim lands, enabling them to have a foothold there? How many of them allowed those same bases, airways and waterways to be used to attack the Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan? How many Muslim leaders rushed to the defence of Islam when our beloved Prophet (SAW) was being defamed in cartoons? How many of them have resisted western demands to alter curriculums to teach western concepts such as democracy, freedom, nationalism? It is the current Muslim rulers who have given up the Islamic sovereignty, leaving this Ummah like sheep at the mercy of hungry wolves.

What the Muslim Ummah needs is a leadership that will be unlike any of the weak states we have in the Muslim world today. One that will not capitulate before foreign nations or institutions like the U.N or the Security Council due to the saying of Allah (swt)

وَلَن يَجْعَلَ اللّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلاً
“And Allah will never give the disbelievers a way(authority) over the believers”(Sura An Nisa 141)

and the saying of the Prophet (SAW) “the Imam is a shield behind which you fight and protect yourselves”.
This Ummah needs a leadership that will stop all cooperation with America and remove their occupying forces from our lands as well as rescue Aafia Siddiqui and all our other brothers and sisters who have been humiliated at the hands of the kuffar in Kashmir, Palestine and Iraq. A leadership that will defend the honour, dignity and integrity of this Ummah, and protect its interests wherever they are.

Can anyone imagine that such a leadership will come from the existing political classes in the Muslim lands?

They are bankrupt of any morality or integrity, they do not possess the political acumen to look after anything but their own financial interests, and are trained in nothing other than the diseased secular politics which keeps them subservient to western needs. Nothing will ever come of them, and they can be confined to the bin of history from an age this Ummah longs to forget.

The only viable solution for the Muslims now is the re-establishment of the Khilafah and the appointment of a sincere Khaleefah across all the Muslim lands. It is imperative that the Ummah throughout the world works towards this one cause, doing all they can to accelerate the inevitable demise of the tyrant rulers of today such as Zardari. This is the only way to restore the sovereignty to Islam as it truly should belong. It is only under the shade of the Khilafah that the Ummah was protected, When the Romans invaded Malatya, (part of Turkey today), in 840 many of its citizens were killed, whilst the women were taken as slaves, it included a Muslim women who was a descendent of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. On hearing about her cries Al-Mu'tasim Billah, the Khaleefah led a huge army to the ‘Amuriyyah fort, where she was imprisoned. Overrunning the fortresses and then conquering the territory, the Muslim woman was freed from her chains. The fort was destroyed and Al-Mu'tasim said to her ‘be a witness with your grandfather Al-Mustafa, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, that I came to rescue you'.
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلّهِ أَمَرَ أَلاَّ تَعْبُدُواْ إِلاَّ إِيَّاهُ ذَلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ
"Indeed, the Rule is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but him, this is the right deen but most people do not know:" [TMQ 12:40]

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Firm Da'wah, Firm Dua

“Their intention is to extinguish Allah’s Light (by blowing) with their mouths: but Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light even though the unbelievers may detest it.” (TMQ 61: 8)

يُرِيدُونَ لِيُطْفِؤُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَاللَّهُ مُتِمُّ نُورِهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ

Firmness in proclaiming the truth to those who aid the tyrants, making them hear the Haqq (true Islam) that they dislike and the criticisms of their false gods, is the best path for those who wish to be from the helpers of the Deen of Allah and of those supporting it. They cannot be harmed by those who oppose them or betray them until the Command of Allah comes while they are in such a state.

It was reported by Imam Ahmad and others from Abi Sa’id al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “A man should not let intimidation by people prevent him from speaking the truth if he sees or witnesses a situation where he should do so. Speaking the truth or mentioning something important will not shorten his life or delay his provision.”

Ibn al-Qayyim said in his book ‘Ighathat al-Lahfan’:

“From the plots of the enemy of Allah (i.e. Satan) is that he makes the believers afraid of his soldiers and allies. So, they do not strive against them; they do not enjoin what is good, and do not forbid what is bad. This is from his greatest plots for the believers, as Allah has informed us:

إِنَّمَا ذَلِكُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ يُخَوِّفُ أَوْلِيَاءهُ فَلاَ تَخَافُوهُمْ وَخَافُونِ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

“It is only Satan that suggests to you the fear of his allies. So, do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers.” (TMQ 3:175).”

The meaning according to the scholars of Tafsir is that Satan makes you afraid of his allies. Qatadah explained this by saying: “He makes them great and powerful in your heart.” This is why Allah (swt) said: “…So, do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers.” So, the stronger your faith becomes, the weaker the fear in your heart will be of Satan’s allies, and the weaker your faith becomes, the stronger the fear in your heart will be of them.”

When the fear of Allah fills the person’s heart, there will be no room left in the heart for fear of anyone else. If the person realizes the greatness of Allah and that He possesses Great Power, Overwhelming, Mighty, Dominating, Supreme, is the One who controls everyone and that person realizes His presence, then everything else will appear insignificant and all of the powers on Earth will be of no significance to him. So, if all of the powers on Earth do end up gathering against him, this will not push him off the path he has chosen or cause him to turn away from his correct belief. This will only increase him in faith and submission:
الَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَالَاتِ اللَّهِ وَيَخْشَوْنَهُ وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا

“…Those who convey the message of Allah and fear Him, and fear none except Allah, Allah is sufficient as a Reckoner.” (TMQ 33: 39).

The Prophet (saw) was the best example in this regard. Reflect over the hadith of ‘Amr bin al-‘As that was reported by Imam Ahmad and others. Reflect over what he (saw) said while standing between all of the disbelievers of Makkah as they were surrounding him while he was in a position of weakness, and how one man grabbed the collar of his cloak while they asked him: “You are the one who says such and such?” – referring to how he would criticize their gods and way of life. So, he replied to them with full clarity and straightforwardness, without fear or hesitation: “Yes, I am the one who says this.” And before this, he had said: “Listen, Quraysh! By the One Whose Hand Muhammad’s soul is in, I have come to you with slaughter!”

He (saw) would keep his Companions firm with the Quran that was being revealed to him, and he would remind them of the stand taken by the people of firmness and strength from the previous nations, saying: “Before your time, there was a man who was taken and had a hole dug for him in the ground, and he was placed in it. A saw was then brought and placed on his head, and he was cut in half and had his flesh combed off of his bones. This would not turn him away from his religion in the least. By Allah, Allah will complete this affair until a traveler will go from San’a’ to Hadramawt without fearing anyone except Allah and the wolves that might attack his sheep. However, you are too hasty.”

The Prophet (saw) struggled against the corrupt thoughts and concepts and exposed their error, falsehood and contradiction with Islam privately and publicly. Today the callers to Islam refute the concepts of democracy, patriotism and capitalism and in doing so never resort to flattery, compromise or accommodation. In fact, the callers to Islam strongly challenge any concept that contradicts Islam. This is a reminder as we carry the dawah in a country that is dropping bombs in the Muslim lands and intimidating Muslims here in America.

The call to Islam is also directed to the Muslims. The dawah is to liberate the Muslims from corrupt and kufr concepts and emotions. The caller to Islam strives to ensure that Islamic thoughts form public opinion, driving the people to act upon them and implement them. It also addresses the emotions of the Muslims, so that they love what pleases Allah and hate what displeases Allah. It is evident from the method employed by the Messenger of Allah that changing the predominant thoughts and emotions is not enough to establish Islam, but that there must also be a seeking of power in order to establish Islam as an authority. This is the reason that the colonialist powers have instructed the agent rulers to use harsh measures to oppose this Islamic dawah. The tyrant rulers have tried all manners of oppression from torture, execution, imprisonment and exile. The kuffar are continuously working to try and prevent the growing call of Khilafah. They have convened conferences and seminars to address the Khilafah, such as America’s Ankara conference. The Heritage Foundation, Nixon Institute, International Crisis Group and the CIA have all published reports about the global call for Khilafah.

The dawah carrier fears only Allah

The methods the tyrants and the enemies of Allah utilize in their war against the believers is to instill fear and the awesomeness of their power.This is a method suggested to them from their leader, Satan. In order to push the believer away from the Truth, Satan always tries to inflate the image of his allies in the believer’s heart and mind. Satan's allies brag about their power and boast of their numbers, such as: the size of their armies, weapons, torture methods and intelligence agencies. They always praise themselves and speak about how great they are, giving the impression that they encompass everything and know every little detail of what is happening in the world.

The believers who stayed true to the pact they made with Allah are not affected by such tyrannical methods and they will not be pushed away from the position they have taken and will not be shaken. Rather, they will only increase in faith and submission:

الَّذِينَ قَالَ لَهُمُ النَّاسُ إِنَّ النَّاسَ قَدْ جَمَعُوا لَكُمْ فَاخْشَوْهُمْ فَزَادَهُمْ إِيمَانًا وَقَالُوا حَسْبُنَا اللَّهُ وَنِعْمَ الْوَكِيلُ (173) فَانْقَلَبُوا بِنِعْمَةٍ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَفَضْلٍ لَمْ يَمْسَسْهُمْ سُوءٌ وَاتَّبَعُوا رِضْوَانَ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ ذُو فَضْلٍ عَظِيمٍ (174) إِنَّمَا ذَلِكُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ يُخَوِّفُ أَوْلِيَاءَهُ فَلَا تَخَافُوهُمْ وَخَافُونِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ مُؤْمِنِينَ

“Those to whom the people said: “Verily, the people have gathered against you a great army. So, fear them.” But it only increased them in faith, and they said: “Allah is sufficient for us, and He is the best disposer of affairs.” So, they returned with grace and bounty from Allah. No harm touched them, and they followed the good Pleasure of Allah, and Allah has great bounty. It is only Satan that suggests to you the fear of his allies. So, do not fear them, and fear Me if you are believers.” (TMQ 3: 173-175).
ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّ اللَّهَ مَوْلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَأَنَّ الْكَافِرِينَ لَا مَوْلَى لَهُمْ
“That is because Allah is the Protector of those who believe, but those who reject Allah have no protector.” (TMQ 47:11)

REFLECTIONS: Dangers of Organized Distraction (Lahw)

The Messenger of Allah (saw) brought the message of Islam to the Arabs of Quraish. This message contained a system of life that would soon give its adherents leadership over the Romans and the Persians. It was narrated that when the Messenger of Allah (saw) first received revelation, he came to Khadija (ra) and proclaimed, “From this day there will be no rest!” Hence the first Ayat commanding the Prophet (saw) to,


اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ
“Read in the Name of your Lord…” [TMQ 96:1]
came with a great burden. It was a weighty message and required an Ummah, characterized by thinking and seriousness, to carry its burden. Because of its tremendous responsibility, this Ummah has been described by Allah (swt) as:


كُنْتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاس
“... the best Ummah brought forward to mankind.”[TMQ 3:110]
The Muslim Ummah, which was once the leading nation of the world, now faces a terrible situation. Our Deen is under attack, we are divided into over 50 insignificant states, and our rulers sell our labor and mineral wealth for worthless pieces of paper. However, the worst aspect of our current situation is that the Islamic Aqeedah has ceased to be the reference point in the Muslim lands. We are constantly being thrown into frivolous pursuits that consume us, distracting us from the serious task of rebuilding this Ummah and taking our rightful position as the leading nation of the world. Hence we witness, with sadness, the ever-increasing soccer (football) and cricket games, in national and international tournaments, and how the Muslims throw themselves at these events, taking pride in their false nations and their trophies.

The Meaning of Distraction (Lahw)

Distraction is mentioned in many occasions in the Quran and Sunnah. It is mentioned in the context of entertainment, for example when RasulAllah (saw) said, “You should (practice) (target) shooting, for it is the best of your entertainment (Lahwikum)” Narrated by Al-Tabarani. It is also mentioned in the context of idle talk, when Allah (swt) says,


وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهْوَ الْحَدِيثِ
“But there are, among men, those who purchase idle talk (Lahw Al-Hadith).”[TMQ 31:6]

Ibn Jareer said that (lahw) is any talk used to impede the Ayat of Allah (swt) and obedience to His order and also “To slander and mock the truth. As Ja’far Al-Saadiq (ra) had said.” [Al-Tafseer Al-Kashif - Mughniyah]. This summarizes the meanings of Lahw in the Qur’an. It is also the saying of Al-Sha’raawi, “Al-Lahw is becoming distracted with something that is forbidden, or becoming distracted with permissible entertainment, keeping you occupied from carrying out an obligation.”


The Hukm Shari’ (Islamic ruling) on Distraction (Lahw)

There are some kinds of lahw, which are halal and mubah (permissible), like sports that achieve a result, such as target shooting (weapons training and hunting), swimming, racing (on foot), wrestling or the like. However, these lahw are halal; as long as it does not cause one to be unmindful of his/her obligations.

Imam Al-Shaatibi says, “Lahw, entertainment and vacancy from any work is Mubah (permissible), if it does not involve a forbidden matter, or occupy one from an obligated matter.”

And he adds, “But he is blameworthy, and the scholars did not agree with it (i.e. they did not like it), rather they would hate to see a man, who was not busy with either improving his livelihood or improving his Hereafter; for he had wasted a period of time which was not used to gain any good for this world, nor for the afterlife.”

And there are some matters of lahw, which are haram (forbidden). These include betting, playing dice (gambling), and being occupied with permissible lahw to the point where one neglects his/her obligations. The last example is haram because of the principle: “All that leads to haram, is itself haram.” For example, lahw that would keep one away from salah or from fasting would be haram. Also the lahw that distracts man from the obligation of carrying the da’wa, and re-establishing the Islamic authority (Khilafah) would also be forbidden, because it distracts man from this obligation.

 Secular Aqeedah and Organized Distraction (Lahw)

The secular Aqeedah is built on the separation of Deen (religion) from life. Consequently, man is left to pursue his desires as there is no repercussion to worry about in the afterlife. Thus, it is in the nature of the secular Aqeedah to seek entertainment. The belief of secularism is a belief of recreation, distracting man from achieving his real goal in life, which is attaining the pleasure of Allah (swt). Instead, man is given the goal of achieving sensual satisfaction. So man strives hard to entertain himself and to seek his own pleasure in life, not worrying about what comes after life. Consequently, it is natural for secular societies to hold organized distractions, such as sports, where athletes play professionally on a national or international level. In addition, staff are appointed to oversee the activities of these athletes and competitors in accordance with their different levels. The events have specific times for training and for the games, each one according to its level and expertise. Television programs are scheduled and radio broadcasts inform the masses about the progress of sports games, until they become the talk of the town, city, region or even the world. The atmosphere surrounding sports has made it the biggest distraction for the sons of the Ummah, to the extent of becoming emotionally invested in a game or having a fanatical attachment to a particular team. Sports events are then played (in the Muslim lands), disregarding the Hukm Shar’i (Islamic laws) regarding speech, conduct and dress while playing, furthering the spread of depravity and bad manners across the Ummah. It has also been used as a way to promote the feeling of pride for the nation (assabiyah), even though there is nothing from in them to be proud of. The leaders use such emotions to distract the people from feeling the emotions that Islam seeks from them, which would naturally arise once they perceived the bad situation this Ummah finds herself in.


The same can be said about organized entertainment in the movie and music industries. They are constantly bombarding people with useless shows to keep them occupied and distracted from the worshipping of Allah (swt).


The Dangers of Organized Distraction (Lahw)

Organized distractions affect the entire life of a Muslim. These distractions turn the Ummah away from taking the Deen as the basis of her life, in belief, worship, in her manners and actions, and in her legislation and constitution, by weakening her reverence and respect for her Deen, causing her to live life without a purpose and walking without a path.


“This world becomes entertainment and games when there is no honorable, lasting purpose behind it, and when it is lived for what it has to offer, detached from the path Allah has set out in it…”[Sayyed Qutb]


The greatest danger in organized distractions is that they divert the Ummah from the correct political awareness, which involves analyzing the issues of the Ummah, as well as international issues, from the angle of Islam. For she no longer comprehends the value of Islam, so her situation only becomes worse as extinction nearly approaches her, and the danger of her massacre increases. These organized distractions divert the Ummah from the vital issues that are tied to her very existence and survival. The pinnacle of these issues is the establishment of the system of the Islam and turning all Muslim lands to Dar Al-Islam (land of the Islamic State).


The Duty towards Organized Distraction (Lahw)

1. The Ummah must realize the reality of organized distractions, and assume her role in facing this serious danger which is targeting the most valuable thing it posses - Islam.


2. She must become precisely aware of those who are behind it and know exactly how to struggle against them. The haram of organized distractions must be shunned, and those distractions that are mubah must be forsaken for the actions that improve his/her Hereafter. Muslims must strive, like the Sahabah (ra), with seriousness and thought, to return to ruling by that which Allah (swt) has revealed and to re-establish the authority of Islam. We should shun the frivolous pursuits, the organized distractions, the computer games, spectator sports, and the like. Instead, we must turn our attention to the return of this Ummah to its position of might, and above all yearn for the meeting with Allah (swt). Such a goal requires seriousness, continuous following up (perseverance) and patience.


The Messenger of Allah (saw) was most truthful when he said,
“The two feet of the son of Adam will not move from near his Lord on the Day of Judgment until he is asked about five matters: about his life, how he spent it; about his youth, how he took care of it; about his wealth, how he earned it and how he spent it; and about that which he acted upon from the knowledge that he acquired.”[Tirmidhi]


We ask Allah (swt) to make us among those who are aware of the importance of time and are serious about the pursuit of the Hereafter. We also ask Him to help this Ummah to rise to her greatest duty of being a witness on the mankind.


هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مِنْ قَبْلُ وَفِي هَذَا لِيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ شَهِيدًا عَلَيْكُمْ وَتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ
“It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation); that the Messenger may be a witness for you, and you be witnesses for mankind!” [TMQ 22:78]

Sources

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Adoption when there is differnece of Opinion

Where there must be unanimity in opinion and where difference is allowed


The Ummah is one Jama'ah in its root. Islam has made clear where differences do not arise and where they can arise.

وَاعْتَصِمُواْ بِحَبْلِ اللّهِ جَمِيعاً وَلاَ تَفَرَّقُوا
"And hold tight to the rope of Allah and divide not," [TMQ Ale-Imran: 103]

Allah (Subhanahu wa ta'aala) orders the Muslims to hold tight and not let go of the rope of Allah (Subhanahu wa ta'aala) and not to divide.

Ibn Masood (ra), Ali bin Abi Talib (ra), and Abu Saeed Al-Kuddrri (ra) said it is the Qur'an. Others said it is the Deen of Allah (Subhanahu wa ta'aala). Others like Ibnul Mubaarak said it is the Jama'ah.

At-Tabari said; "...and do not disperse away from the Deen of Allah and His covenant which he took from you in His Book: that you should be together in obeying Him and His Messenger (SalAllahu alaihi wasallam)."

Ibn Katheer said; "He ordered them to stay in the Jama`ah and not to divide."

Al-Qurtubi said; "Do not divide as the Jews and the Christians in their Deen...and it could mean do not separate based on your desires and interests."
Therefore, the disagreement that Muslims are not allowed to have is in the fundamentals of their Deen, not in its branches.

Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu `Amir `Abdullah bin Luhay said; "We performed Hajj with Mu`awiyah bin Abi Sufyan. When we arrived at Makkah, he stood up after praying Dhuhr and said; ‘The Messenger of Allah (SalAllahu alaihi wasallam) said;

إِنَّ أَهْلَ الْكِتَابَيْنِ افْتَرَقُوا فِي دِينِهِمْ عَلى ثِنْتَيْنِ وَسَبْعِينَ مِلَّةً، وَإِنَّ هذِهِ الْأُمَّةَ سَتَفْتَرِقُ عَلى ثَلَاثٍ وَسَبْعِينَ مِلَّةً يَعْنِي الْأَهْوَاءَ كُلُّهَا فِي النَّارِ إِلَّا وَاحِدَةً وَهِيَ الْجَمَاعَةُ وَإِنَّهُ سَيَخْرُجُ فِي أُمَّتِي أَقْوَامٌ تَجَارَى بِهِمْ تِلْكَ الْأَهْوَاءُ كَمَا يَتَجَارَى الْكَلَبُ بِصَاحِبِه، لَا يَبْقَى مِنْهُ عِرْقٌ وَلَا مَفْصِلٌ إِلَّا دَخَلَه

‘The People of the Two Scriptures divided into seventy-two sects. This Ummah will divide into seventy-three sects, all in the Fire except one, that is, the Jama`ah. Some of my Ummah will be guided by desire, like one who is infected by rabies; no vein or joint will be saved from these desires.''"

This hadith was also narrated by Abu Dawood (2/503), Ahmad (4/102) and al-Haakim (1/128) among others, with similar wording but with the following addition;

ثنتان وسبعون في النار. قيل: يا رسول الله
من هم؟ قال: الجماعة
"Seventy two in hell fire and one in the Jannah: that is the 'Jama`ah."

Some scholars, such as ash-Shawkani and al-Kawthari mistakenly said that this addition is weak. Ibn Hazm wrongly said that it was fabricated.

So the subject that the hadith discusses is not the differences, which arise from interpretation of the texts, which are preponderant in meaning, but it is condemning those firqah (sects) that have differed in the foundations of the Deen.

Rather, those sects that are mentioned in the hadith are those who have left the fold of Islam such as the Qadiani, who claimed Prophethood after Muhammad (SalAllahu alaihi wasallam), or those Alawi, who claim Ali (ra) to be god incarnate (may Allah protect us from such deviation), or those who deny the punishment in the Ahkirah, etc.

Why differences exist

Difference in opinion exists because the Shari'ah rule, which represents the address of the Legislator related to the actions of the servants, have come in the Qur'an and the Hadith, and many of these carry several meanings according to the Arabic language and according to Shari'ah. Hence, it is natural and inevitable for people to differ in their understanding and for this difference in understanding to reach the level of disparity and contradiction in the intended meaning. Thus, it is inevitable for different and contradictory understandings to be reached. These could be a host of different and contradictory understandings in the one matter.

Bukhari extracted on the authority of Nafi', on that of Ibnu Omar ® who said: "the Messenger of Allah (saw) said on the day of Al-Ahzab (the battle of the Ditch): "None of you should pray Asr except in Bani Quraytha." The time of Asr entered while some were still on the way; so some said: "We should not pray until we reach Bani Quraytha." Others said: "No, we should pray because the instruction does not mean this." This was mentioned to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and he did not rebuke any of them." When the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "None of you should pray Asr except in Bani Quraytha.", some understood that he was urging haste and they prayed in the way, while others understood that he (saw) had literally ordered them to pray Asr in Bani Quraytha, thus they delayed Asr until they reached their destination. When the Messenger of Allah (saw) heard of this, he approved of both camps' actions.

There are many verses and Ahadith similar to this. The difference of opinion in the one matter makes it incumbent upon the Muslims to adopt one opinion from among these various opinions, for all of them are Shari'ah rules, and the rule of Allah (swt) in the one single matter does not multiply. Therefore, it is imperative to determine one single rule and adopt it. hence, the Muslim's adoption of one specific Shari'ah rule is necessary and inevitable when he undertakes the action, for the undertaking of the action obligates the Muslim to accomplish it according to the Shari'ah rule, whether this were a Fardh (obligatory), or Mandub (recommended), or Haram (forbidden), or Makruh (despised), or Mubah (permitted), and this makes it incumbent upon the Muslims to adopt a specific Shari'ah rule when taking the rules to act upon them, whether he were a Mujtahid or a Muqallid or otherwise.

Where adoption is a must to settle the difference of opinion

The Khalifah adopts a host of specific Shari'ah rules, which he will enact as a constitution and as laws. If he adopts a Shari'ah rule, this rule alone becomes the Shari'ah rule that must be acted upon and it becomes a binding law that every citizen must obey openly and privately.

The evidence of this article is derived from the Ijma'a (General Consensus) of the Sahaba. The Ijma'a of the Sahaba has been established in stipulating that the Khalifah reserves the right to adopt specific Shari'ah rules. It has also been established that it is obligatory to act upon the rules adopted by the Khalifah. A Muslim is forbidden from acting upon other than what the Khalifah has adopted in terms of Shari'ah rules even if these rules were Shari'ah rules adopted by a Mujtahid. This is so because the rule of Allah that becomes duly binding upon all the Muslims is that which the Khalifah adopts. The rightly guided Khulafa' proceeded in this manner. They adopted a host of specific rules and ordered their implementation; thus, the Muslims, with the Sahaba amongst them, used to act upon these rules and abandon their own Ijtihad. For instance, Abu Bakr ® adopted in the matter of divorce a rule stipulating that the triple divorce would be considered as one divorce if it were pronounced in one go. He also adopted in the matter of distributing the wealth upon the Muslims a rule stipulating that wealth should be distributed equally amongst the Muslims, regardless of seniority in Islam or anything else. The Muslims followed him in this while the judges and the Walis implemented the rules which he had adopted.
Examples of Ijma as-Sohaba (RA)

When Omar ® took office, he adopted in the same two matters different opinions to those of Abu Bakr's; thus he imposed the rule stipulating that the triple divorce in one sitting is considered as three. He also distributed the wealth among the Muslims according to their seniority in Islam and according to their needs, rather than equally. The Muslims duly followed him in this while the judges and the Walis implemented the rules he had adopted. Then Omar ® adopted a rule stipulating that the land conquered in war is a spoil for Bayt-al-Maal, (the State's treasury) not for the fighters, and that the land should remain with its owners and should not be divided among the fighters nor among the Muslims. The Walis and the judges duly complied and implemented the rule which the Khalifah had adopted.

Therefore, the rightly guided Khulafa' proceeded in this way, adopting and ordering people to abandon their Ijtihad and the rules which they had acted upon and adhere to that the which the Khalifah had adopted. The Ijma'a of the Sahaba was established on two matters; these are the adoption and the obligation of acting upon that which the Khalifah adopts. Based on this Ijma'a of the Sahaba, the celebrated Shari'ah principles were obtained.

These are:

 1- The Sultan reserves the right to effect as many judgements as the problems which arise.
 2- The order of the Imam settles disagreement.
 3- The order of the Imam is binding.

In essence, the adoption is necessary when a difference of opinion in the one matter occurs. Hence, in order to act upon the Shari'ah rule in this matter, it is imperative to adopt a specific rule in this matter.

Practicalities of adoption

As for the Khalifah, it is imperative for him to adopt a host of specific rules according to which he assumes managing people's affairs. Hence, it is necessary for him to adopt certain rules pertaining what is of general nature to all the Muslims, in terms of government and authority matters, such as Zakat, levies, Kharaj (land tax) and foreign relations, and also, in terms of all that is related to the unity of the State and the rule.

However, his adoption of the rules is subject to scrutiny. If the Khalifah could not undertake an action, whose undertaking necessitates managing people's affairs according to the Islamic Shari'ah rules, unless he adopted a specific rule in that matter, in this case the adoption would be obligatory upon the Khalifah.

This would be in concordance with the Shari'ah principle stipulating that: "Whatever is necessary to accomplish a duty is in itself a duty.", such the signing of treaties for instance. However, if the Khalifah could manage people's affairs in a specific matter according to the Islamic Shari'ah rules without having to resort to the adoption of a specific rule in this matter, in this case the adoption would be permitted for him rather than an obligation, such as "Nisab Al-Shahada" (the minimum number of witnesses in a testimony) for instance. In this case, it is permitted for him to adopt or not to adopt, for in essence, the adoption is permitted and not obligatory; this is so because the Sahaba ® have unanimously consented that the Imam can adopt and they have not consented that the Imam must adopt. Therefore, the adoption itself is Mubah, and it does not become obligatory unless the obligatory management of people's affairs cannot be accomplished except through adoption; then it becomes obligatory so that the duty could be accomplished.

The Khalifah does not adopt any specific Shari'ah rule in matters related to rituals except in Zakat and Jihad, nor does he adopt any thought from among the thoughts related to the Islamic Aqeedah.

Evidence of this article is derived from the fact that the adoption is in itself Mubah for the Khalifah and not obligatory upon him. Just as he is entitled to adopt certain rules, he is also entitled to refrain from adopting certain rules. It is not matter which he imposes upon people, because it is not them who adopt, it is rather a matter that concerns him only; thus he is entitled to either adopt or to abstain from adopting. He is entitled to act according to what he deems fit. It emerged from the events of Al-Ma'mun, pertaining the Fitna (strife) of the creation of the Qur'an, that adoption in the thoughts related to Aqeedah matters has caused problems to the Khalifah and Fitna amongst the Muslims. It also emerged from the Fatimide's adoption of Imam Ja'afar's school of thought that this caused discontent amongst the followers of other schools of thought and a resentment towards this type of adoption, especially in the opinions related to Aqeedah matters and the opinions related to rituals. Therefore, the Khalifah deems it fit to abstain from adopting in matters related to Aqeedah and in rules related to rituals in order to avoid problems and in order to observe the consent and the tranquillity of the Muslims. Hence, the Khalifah chooses not to adopt in these two matters and Shari'ah has not made it an obligation upon him to adopt; thus he may choose not to adopt. Abstaining from adopting in matters of Aqeedah and in rituals does not mean that it is forbidden for the Khalifah to adopt in them, it rather means that the Khalifah chooses not adopt, for he can either adopt or abstain from adopting. Thus he may choose not to adopt. That is why the article stated that the Khalifah does not adopt rather than stating that the Khalifah is forbidden from adopting, which indicates that he may choose not to adopt.

As for choosing to abstain from adopting in Aqeedah matters and in rituals, this is based upon two issues: The hardship caused by coercing people to follow a specific opinion related to Aqeedah matters and the fact that what prompts the Khalifah to adopt is in fact the management of the Muslims' affairs by one single opinion and the preserving of the unity of the State and the unity of the rule. Hence, he adopts in matters related to relationships between individuals and related to public matters and he does not adopt in matters related to relationship of man with his God.

Adoption by the Hizb

The Shar'a does not require the mere presence of a group. Rathe hat the Shar'a requires is the establishment of a group whose purpose is to establish this order. The evidences for the existence of the group clarify this for us.

In His SWT saying; "And let there arise out of you a group inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining the ma'roof (good) and forbidding the munkar (evil). And it is they who are successful." [TMQ 3:104]. The Shar'a has obliged the establishment of a political group whose ideology is Islam and that carries the thoughts and Shar'ee rules necessary for the achievement of the aims the group was established for, which are the dominance, establishment and accession to power [of Islam]. The order is not to have a group for its own sake. It is rather to realise what was commanded, which is the da'wah and enjoining the ma'roof and forbidding the munkar. Also, it is not the da'wah and enjoining the good and forbidding the evil for their own sake. Rather the order is to realise the objective for which the da'wah and enjoining the ma'roof and forbidding the munkar exist; dominance, consolidation and accession to power.

The Messenger SAW said; "It is not allowed for three people to be on any part of the earth without appointing one of them as ameer (leader)." [Narrated by Ahmad b. Hanbal]. The Shar'a indicated that for any joint action that the Muslims have been ordered to perform they must have an ameer. The obedience to him will be obligatory in the matter he has been made ameer for, and for the people over whom he has been made ameer. The group must comply with the order of the ameer, so that the results of this collective work are achieved according to the Shar'a. - Since Allah SWT has enjoined upon the Muslims many obligations that are entrusted to the Khaleefah only, then it has become imperative to appoint a Khaleefah in order to realise these obligations. Since the appointment of a Khaleefah and the establishment of the Khilafah cannot be achieved except by a group, then the presence of a group whose aim is to establish the Khaleefah and the Khilafah becomes inevitable. This is based on the principle: ‘That which is necessary to establish a wajib is itself a waajib.'

So it becomes clear that the presence of a group is inextricably linked to the presence of the required Shar'ee objective. Thus, it is not a group that merely undertakes the da'wah to Islam. It is not a group that conveys the message just for the sake of conveying. Rather it is a group established for the purpose of establishing Islam in the life of the Muslims, through the establishment of the Islamic State, which is considered the Shar'ee method of applying all the rules of Islam, both individual and collective. Hence a group must exist whose purpose is to realise the aim for which it has been established.

Until the group can be considered to have fulfilled all that is required of it, it must do the following things.

It must adopt all the thoughts, Shar'ee rules and opinions that are necessary for its work, and it should adhere to them in word, deed and thought. This is because the aim of adoption is to protect the unity of the party. If the group is established and its members have different thoughts and diverse Ijtihaadaat the group will be afflicted with splits and fragmentation, even though they may be united on the aim and on Islam as well. It is allowed for the Ameer to change the means and styles according to the requirements of the work.

Since the group will be dealing with a wide expanse of land and its reach will extend to many States, then the sheer size and volume of the work necessitates the presence of an administrative system through which the party can pursue the da'wah and realize its aims in all spheres of its work. The administration system will organize and regulate the movement of the da'wah. It will follow the culturing of the shabab and prepare the general atmosphere for the idea. It will organize the intellectual and political struggle. The party will appear to the Ummah as a body, which committed itself to realise this task. Hence, there must be an organisational structure, which is devoted to realising the aim as best as possible, so it monitors the achievements of the work and maintains them.

So the party must adopt an administrative system or an organizational structure that will enable it to organise the da'wah successfully, thus leading to the attainment of the aim. The party must adopt an administrative law through which the body and its movement is organised, where the rules regarding the powers of the Ameer, how he runs the party and how he is selected are defined. It explains who will appoint those responsible for the areas and provinces, and what the limits of their powers are. It is the law that will organise the administration concerning every action of the Hizb and specify the mandatory powers of everyone concerned. All of these rules will take the Hukm of the means and styles that are required for executing the Sharee'ah rules related to the work. It is obligatory to adhere to the adopted administrative styles as long as the Ameer considers them necessary, because obedience to the Ameer is waajib.

26 Rabi' II 1431
2010/04/10

View on the News 09-04-10

British Army uses mosques on UK firing range


The UK army was accused of gross insensitivity yesterday for putting up seven mosque-like structures on a firing range. Muslim leaders said the replicas were used as symbols of danger and reinforced negative stereotypes of Islam. The fake buildings - complete with green-domed roofs - were installed on the Black Beck range at Catterick Garrison in North Yorkshire. During training exercises, soldiers are instructed to fire at wooden targets mounted on rails which emerge from behind the 'mosques'. Last night, the British Ministry of Defence apologised and said it had 'no intention of offending religious sensibilities'. But a spokesman said it was crucial that the 'generic Eastern buildings' were put up to replicate conditions in Afghanistan ahead of future deployments.

US worried about Russian- Venezuelan arms deal

The United States Department last week questioned Venezuela's need to buy billions of dollars in weapons from Russia, voicing concern that the arms may end up elsewhere in Latin America. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley on Monday said that while Russia and Venezuela have the right to pursue relations, the United States is hard-pressed to see what legitimate defense needs Venezuela has for the equipment. If Venezuela is going to increase its military hardware, the U.S. does not want to see the weapons migrate into other parts of the hemisphere, said Crowley. The U.S. has previously cautioned Venezuela against its arms build-up, warning its actions could endanger regional stability. Earlier Monday, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said his country could sell as much as US$5 billion worth of weapons to Venezuela. Mr. Putin visited Venezuela last week to sign military and financial agreements with President Hugo Chavez.?The two countries also formalized a deal to establish a joint venture for oil and gas exploration in eastern Venezuela.
Turkish PM Erdogan says Israel is threat to peace

This week Turkey's Prime Minister has described Israel as the main threat to peace in the Middle East. Recep Tayyip Erdogan was speaking during a visit to Paris.. Relations between the two countries have been worsening since the Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip in 2009, made worse by a recent diplomatic row. Mr Erdogan was speaking to journalists before meeting the French President Nicolas Sarkozy. "It is Israel that is the main threat to regional peace," he said. "If a country uses disproportionate force, in Palestine, in Gaza, uses phosphorus bombs we are not going to say 'well done.'" Mr Netanyahu said he regretted the Turkish prime minister's comments. "We are interested in good relations with Turkey and regret that Mr Erdogan chooses time after time to attack Israel," he told reporters in Israel. The countries have been allies in the past. But earlier this week, the Turkish ambassador to Israel was recalled by Ankara, weeks after being humiliated in public by the Israeli deputy foreign minister. Ambassador Oguz Celikkol was called into the Israeli foreign ministry in January and rebuked over a Turkish television series that showed Israeli intelligence agents kidnapping children. Mr Celikkol was made to sit on a low chair while being lectured by Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon. Mr Ayalon later apologised for the rebuke. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has compared Mr Erdogan to Presidents Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Libya's leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Kyrgyzstan: a Russian revolution?

This week the UK Guardian Newspaper reported that The US is on the back foot in Central Asia after Vladimir Putin appears to be winning a round in the new Great Game. Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin moved quickly today to recognise the new powers-that-be in Kyrgyzstan while disavowing any role in the overthrow of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev's regime. "Neither Russia, nor your humble servant, nor Russian officials have any links whatsoever to these events," Putin said in a typically sardonic statement that invited disbelief. As far as he was concerned, he said, opposition leader Roza Otunbayeva was "the new head of government". But if Moscow were found to have had a hand in this latest upheaval, it would hardly come as a shock. Machiavellian Russian machinations in Kyrgyzstan, as in the other former Soviet republics of central Asia, has become the norm in the Putin era. Competition with China and the US for control of strategically important energy resources and transit routes is one key motivator. More fundamentally, Moscow still unfashionably insists on regarding this vast region as falling within its sphere of influence. Evidence of Russian meddling in Kyrgyzstan is not hard to find. Financial and commercial blandishments dangled by Putin during a visit to Moscow by Bakiyev last year, including a $2bn loan, preceded a decision by the then president to evict the US from its Manas air base, a key staging and supply route to Afghanistan. Only some nifty footwork by the Obama administration, and a sudden Bakiyev volte-face, allowed the US to hang on to Manas.

Zardari stripped of constitutional powers

The parliament of Pakistan has voted unanimously in favour of measures which limit key presidential powers. The measures transfer certain powers from the office of the president to the prime minister and take away his power to dismiss elected governments. Supporters say the legislation will strengthen parliamentary democracy, weakened by periods of military rule. The bill was approved unanimously by Pakistan's National Assembly. It now needs approval from the upper house. The constitution as it stands confers vast powers on the president, including the power to appoint military chiefs. That will end, as will the president's ability to dismiss all or any of the central or provincial governments in Pakistan.

26 Rabi' II 1431
2010/04/10

Monday, April 05, 2010

View on the news -01-04-2010

Belgium to ban the burqa
The draft legislation in Belgium, aimed at clamping down on Islamic extremism, forbids anyone from hiding their faces in public. And those who break the law will be fined or sent to prison for up to a week if the legislation is approved. A committee of MPs voted unanimously yesterday to put the hard-line bill to a full parliamentary vote on 22 April. If passed, Belgium will become the first country in Europe to impose a complete ban on the wearing of full-face veils. The law has cross-party support and is likely to be voted through. "We cannot allow someone to claim the right to look at others without being seen," said liberal MP Daniel Bacquelaine, who proposed the bill. "It is necessary that the law forbids the wearing of clothes that totally mask and encloses an individual."Mr Bacquelaine estimated that a few hundred women in Belgium wore facial veils, adding that it was a rising trend. Belgium's Muslim population stands at about 600,000, or 6 per cent of the total. More than one-third of those are Moroccans or of Moroccan descent. The second largest Muslim ethnic group is made up of Turks.

European Islamophobia spreads to Poland
In a sight familiar in some west European countries but new to Poland, dozens of protesters demonstrated in a Warsaw suburb last weekend against the construction of a mosque. Plans by Poland's tiny Muslim community to build a place of worship and an Islamic cultural centre face opposition in a sign that concerns about Islam may be spreading eastwards to the staunchly Catholic European Union member. Between 15,000 and 30,000 Muslims, many of them immigrants from Chechnya, live in Poland -- the biggest ex-communist EU state where more than 90 percent of the 38-million population declare themselves Catholics. A telephone survey conducted on March 25 among 500 Poles showed 48 percent opposed construction of a mosque with a minaret in their neighborhood, while 42 had nothing against it. "This fear comes from a lack of knowledge... The average citizen knows a Muslim was behind the World Trade Centre attacks but doesn't follow the differences within Islam. Poles have simplistic ideas about Islam as they lack their own experience with Muslims", said Agata Skoworn-Nalborczyk, an Islam specialist at the Warsaw University.

America intervenes to stage manage Sudan's election
The US special envoy for Sudan, Scott Gration, held talks in Khartoum on Thursday with opposition leaders in a bid to rescue this month's Sudanese elections. Gration, who flew in on Wednesday according to diplomatic sources, met separately with Umma party members, Islamist leader Hassan al-Turabi and Democratic Unionist Party head Mohammed Osman al-Mirghani. The mission comes a day after presidential hopeful Yassir Arman pulled out of April 11-13 vote for fear of fraud, casting doubt on the electoral process and clearing the way for a likely first-round win by President Omar al-Beshir. The move from Arman, candidate of the former rebel Sudan People's Liberation Movement from the south of the country, came after Beshir ruled out deferring the first multi-party Sudanese polls in 24 years.Already before Arman's pullout, the United States, Britain -- Sudan's former colonial power -- and Norway, a main provider of aid, on Wednesday expressed concern over the elections. "We urge all parties in Sudan to work urgently to ensure that elections can proceed peacefully and credibly in April," US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Store said."We are deeply concerned by reports of continued administrative and logistical challenges, as well as restrictions on political freedoms," they said in a joint statement.

Moscow Accuses West of 'Narco-Aggression'
Russia has accused the United States of "conniving" with Afghan drug producers by not destroying opium crops as U.S. troops advance in Helmand Province, one of the major opium growing regions. The allegation, which came in a statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry, was the second time this week that Moscow has criticized the West over the opium issue. NATO rejected the charge and said Russia could help by providing more troops to combat the insurgency. U.S. Marines in Helmand Province have told villagers that they will not destroy this year's crops. In the Taliban stronghold of Marjah, which was captured by U.S. troops last month, the U.S. offered to pay poppy farmers to destroy their own crops and provide seed for them to plant other crops next year. Apart from these token gestures the US has done little to eradicate Afghanistan's opium crops. Afghanistan produces over 90 percent of the world's opium and Russia has become its largest market for the drug.

Pak-US ‘slave' dialogue was a good step forward : Wall Street Journal
The United States must deliver what Pakistan needs rapidly, and without too much intrusive monitoring of its strategic nuclear assets, the US newspaper ‘the Wall Street Journal' writes while commenting on last week's Pakistan-US strategic dialogue held in Washington. Terming the strategic dialogue a good step forward, it said, the US must also give the Pakistan military more usable weapons to fight its militancy. The newspaper said that the US must use its influence on India to give Pakistan breathing room, so it can concentrate on the war within rather than stay ready for action on two fronts, one against India and the other on the Afghan
border. Opening US markets to Pakistani textiles and other goods will also help in the near term. In the long run, Pakistan needs help to move up the economic value chain and into manufacturing goods. With its growing population, it needs GDP growth of 6 percent or more each year to keep improving the lives of its 175 million inhabitants, half of whom are below 18 years of age. That growth depends on foreign investment, which is critically dependent on security and good governance, both of which have been in short supply in recent years. But Pakistan must also avoid becoming dependent on aid or ceding its sovereignty in the process of acquiring aid. As former military dictator, Mohammad Ayub Khan, put it bluntly: Pakistan needs "friends not masters," it concluded.

Al-Quds will not be liberated by any amount of lip-service

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Most Esteemed Brothers!

Al-Quds will not be liberated by any amount of lip-service

But it will only be liberated by troops of soldiers fighting the Jewish State on the battlefield!

The Arab rulers concluded their 22nd Summit meeting today, 28th March, 2010 after two days of deliberations at Sirte, Libya which was preceded by a preparatory meeting of their foreign ministers on 25th and 26th of March, 2010 who prepared the agenda for the Summit meeting. The Summit resolutions were replete with old and new terms, like ‘Peace Process', ‘Arab-Israeli Conflict', ‘The Arab Initiative', The Jewish refusal to open the Haram Ibraheem and Masjid Bilal, as well as the Jewish refusal to stop their policy of Settlements and the ramifications of these on direct and indirect negotiations...the situation in Iraq and the Emirate Islands, supporting the peace and development in Sudan, Somalia and the Comoros Islands, making the region free from nuclear weapons etc...Then there was the an additional resolution for a new summit conference where the summit leaders would merely exchange greetings and compliments! All there are merely ineffective and meaningless resolutions which do not address the issue meaningfully, rather they further complicate the issues, and they are mere rhetoric devoid of real meaning! Even the final communiqué at the end of the summit was read out hurriedly as if the summit leaders were ashamed of it!


However, from the beginning of the preparatory meeting to issue of the final communiqué, there are two issues worth considering:

The first is that the British agents were feverishly engaged in trying to influence and control the resolutions of the Arab League. Yemen submitted a proposal form an ‘Arab Union' in the place of ‘Arab League' and it was apparent that Yemen had agreed upon this with the Summit President, i.e. the Libyan ruler and the Libyan delegation immediately rose to welcome the proposal, as if it was prearranged! And then Qadhafi said that the proposal was agreed upon, on the other hand Qadhafi, in his capacity as the president of the summit demanded that he, as the summit president be given powers to hold the Secretary General of the Arab League to account and to call for special summit. All of these prove that the British want to find an alternative to the Arab League through their agents, i.e. establish a replacement for the Arab League, and that is because the Arab League which was devised by the British on 22nd March, 1945 has become an extended arm of the Americans in the recent years which can be seen in the actual resolutions of the Arab League... The Arab League is based in Cairo, and the president of Egyptian regime is an American agent who guards the League and the Secretary General being the supervisor. However, the attempts of the British and their agents, despite their manoeuvring are unlikely to succeed on this issue, rather it is most likely that these attempts are merely probes to test water to see how thing move and then take the next steps!

The second issue is the subject of Al-Quds, the resolutions have indeed touched upon the subject of Al-Quds which delighted the conference with sweet talk...they ‘triumphantly' declared that they have prepared a plan to liberate Al-Quds and that this plan rested on three pillars: political, legal and financial...so they called upon the UN Security Council to shoulder its responsibilities and move to take steps and necessary arrangements to resolve the Arab "Israeli" conflict...then they decided to take recourse to the International Court of Justice in order to confront the "Israeli" crimes in the holy city. Also they decided to support Al-Quds with a sum of half a billion dollars to face up to the "Israeli" settlement plans. They also decided to appoint an authorised commissioner for Al-Quds under the auspices of the Arab League. And lastly though not the least, was the fierce competition between them to demonstrate their love and compassion for Al-Quds and praise for Al-Aqsa. During the preparatory ministerial meeting that preceded the summit, the Egyptian foreign ministry spokesman scored a point over his colleagues by declaring that Egypt "proposed" to name the summit meeting as the Al-Quds Conference, to which the Syrian permanent representative to the Arab League reacted by saying that it was his country which "demanded" the Arab foreign ministers to rename the meeting as the Al-Quds Conference,...Thus the Arabs score evenly, whether they are the moderates or otherwise! Indeed, it is Erdogan for whom the Americans have designed and crafted a role to talk fiercely in the region; he said such things about Al-Quds and its praise that even the Arabs have not! Were it not for the fact that Ashkenazi, the Chief of the Jewish army was in Turkey only yesterday at the invitation of the Erdogan himself, to attend a military conference, people would have thought that Erdogan fiery speech was a declaration of war against the Jewish state!!

O People! These rulers have brains, but they think not, they do have ears, but they hear not, and they have eyes, but they see not; they are blind, not for the eyes but blind from the hearts that lie in their chests! Can Al-Quds be liberated by Commissioner who has no power at all? Or can it be liberated by the financial support which can not reach Al-Quds except under the spears of the Jews? Or, Can it be liberated by urging the UN Security Council which established the Jewish state in Palestine in the first place? Or can it be liberated by taking recourse to the International Court of Justice which neither rules what is rightful, nor prevents that which is wrong?! Can the hot and fiery speeches in the love and praise of Al-Quds liberate it while the speaker inaugurates the embassy of the Jewish state in his country and plays host to the killers of Al-Quds?!

O People! There are among you those who say that the even if the rulers withdraw from the occupied Palestine, they will never give up Al-Aqsa and Al-Quds, if not because of their Taqwa, then at least out of shame...But here is Al-Quds which is being bitten from all its sides and even at its heart, its dome, its mosque, the Jews have infiltrated under the mosque and over it, they have excavated ground from under the mosque and violated its sanctities. They have filled the land with settlements in front of the mosque and behind it. Furthermore, the Jewish state had pacified their summit on the night of its inauguration by launching an offensive assault over Gaza and (hotly) declaring that the settlement policy will continue without any change, with the rulers silently hearing and watching all this while meeting, greeting, dining all laughing!

O Muslims! Indeed Al-Quds will only be liberated by a leader who is sincere and dedicated to his Creator Allah (swt) and truthful to Allah's Prophet (saw) who will lead the Muslim armies and gather all able persons into it... it will be liberated by a strong leader who is pious and has the characteristics of Al- Farouq who had opened Al-Quds in the 15th year of Hijrah, he will be a leader who stands the trust of Al-Farouq who had decreed that No Jew will have his abode in Al-Quds. Such a leader will bear the character of Sultan Salahuddin who had recaptured Al-Quds from the filth of the Crusaders in the year 583A.H and he will be like Qadhi Muhiuddin who had recited the Ayah as he started to deliver the first Friday Khutbah after Al-Quds was liberated:

فَقُطِعَ دَابِرُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا وَالْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
"So the root of the people who did wrong was cut off. And all praise and thanks are Allâh's, the Lord of the 'آlamîn (mankind, jinn, and all that exists)." [TMQ al-An'aam: 06: 45]

Such a leader will bear the character of Sultan Abdul Hameed II who guarded and protected Al-Quds and refused Hertzel and his men to hand over Palestine to them despite being offered enormous sums of money for the treasury of the state in 1901. He told them: "Palestine is not my property, rather it is owned by my people who have nurtured it with their blood. Let the Jews keep their millions, it is easy for me to have a knife pierce through my body rather than see Palestine being given away from my state. This will never happen."

This is how Al-Quds will be liberated from the clutches of the Jewish gangs by the Muslim armies which will come from where they do not expect and deal such a blow to them that they will forget the whispers of the devil and the columns of the Muslim armies will hasten up to either of two good ends: Victory or Martyrdom, as Allah (swt) has said:

 فَإِمَّا تَثْقَفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْحَرْبِ فَشَرِّدْ بِهِمْ مَنْ خَلْفَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَذَّكَّرُونَ...

"So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson." [TMQ al Anfaal: 08: 057]

وَأَخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَخْرَجُوكُمْ...
"and turn them out from where they have turned you out." [TMQ al-Baqarah 02: 191]

This is how it will be O Muslims!

O Soldiers in the armies of the Muslim lands! There is no argument for those who protest this, and there is no excuse for those apoligise, so do not say that the rulers are preventing you, it is you who has the power in his hands, in fact it is you who protect them and their nooses are in your hands. If you obey them, you fall into sin and transgression and you will not turn up at the pool of the Prophet (saw). And if you did not assist them in their crimes and did not believe in their lies, then the Prophet (saw) will be from among you and you will be from among him and you will turn up at his (saw) pool, and the reward for the those do good deeds is good. Tirmidhi reports on the authority of Ka'ab ibn ‘Ajrah (r.a) who says that the Prophet (saw) said:
«أعيذك بالله يا ‏ ‏ كعب بن عجرة ‏ ‏من أمراء يكونون من بعدي فمن ‏ ‏غَشِيَ ‏ ‏أبوابهم فصدقهم في كذبهم وأعانهم على ظلمهم فليس مني ولست منه ولا يرد علي الحوض ومن ‏ ‏غَشِيَ ‏ ‏أبوابهم أو لم ‏ ‏يَغْشَ ‏ ‏فلم يصدقهم في كذبهم ولم يعنهم على ظلمهم فهو مني وأنا منه وسيرد علي الحوض »

Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said to him, "I commend you to Allah to protect you from the rulership of the foolish." He asked what that was, and Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) replied, "After my time rulers will arise whose falsehood will be believed and who will be assisted in their oppression by those who enter their presence. They have nothing to do with me and I have nothing to do with them, and they will never come down to me at the Reservoir (of Kauther). But they, who do not enter their presence, believe their falsehood and help them in their oppression, those belong to me and I belong to them, and those ones will come down to me at the Reservoir."
O Soldiers in the armies of the Muslim lands!

Hizb ut-Tahrir is helping you to establish Khilafah, so you help it, and calling upon you to fight the Jews, so stand up to its call, the fighting with the Jews is destined in the Book of Allah (swt):
فَإِذَا جَاءَ وَعْدُ الآخِرَةِ لِيَسُوءُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَلِيَدْخُلُوا الْمَسْجِدَ كَمَا دَخَلُوهُ أَوَّلَ مَرَّةٍ وَلِيُتَبِّرُوا مَا عَلَوْا تَتْبِيراً عَسَى رَبُّكُمْ أَنْ يَرْحَمَكُمْ وَإِنْ عُدْتُمْ عُدْنَا وَجَعَلْنَا جَهَنَّمَ لِلْكَافِرِينَ حَصِيراً

And it is also recorded in the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw) as reported in Muslim on the authority of Ibn ‘Omar (r.a):
«لَتُقَاتِلُنَّ الْيَهُودَ فَلَتَقْتُلُنَّهُمْ حَتَّى يَقُولَ الْحَجَرُ يَا مُسْلِمُ هَذَا يَهُودِىٌّ فَتَعَالَ فَاقْتُلْهُ»

You will certainly fight the Jews and kill them until the stone will say: O Muslim! Here is a Jew, Come and kill him.

Is there no among you a wise man who will launch out along with his troops and trample upon all rulers who block his path and he will establish the rule of Islam, i.e. the Khilafah on the path of the Prophethood and thus liberate Al-Aqsa and address the first Khutbah after liberating it from the clutches of the Jews as was done by Qadhi Mohiuddin who recited: فَقُطِعَ دَابِرُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا وَالْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

"So the root of the people who did wrong was cut off. And all praise and thanks are Allâh's, the Lord of the 'آlamîn (mankind, jinn, and all that exists)." [TMQ al-An'aam: 06: 45]

Who will be mentioned by Allah (swt) to those with Him and he will be covered by Allah's angels from the heavens and the good people of the world, he will be loved in this world and will be loved in the Hereafter, and this indeed is the true success?
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُونَ

"O you who believe! Answer Allâh (by obeying Him) and (His) Messenger when he [sal-Allâhu 'alayhi wa sallam] calls you to that which will give you life, and know that Allâh comes in between a person and his heart (i.e. He prevents an evil person to decide anything). And verily, to Him you shall (all) be gathered." [TMQ al Anfaal: 08: 024]

12 Rabi' II 1431
2010/03/28


Hizb-ut Tahrir