israeli terror on the seas - wordpress.com...newsbites 2 :: khilafah magazine:: june 2010 violence...

Israeli Terror on the Seas

O you who believe, respond to the call of Allah and His Messenger when He calls you to that which would give you life...

JUMADA II - RAJAB 1431 ··· JUNE 2010 ··· ISSUE: 11

ISRAEL: THE END IS IN SIGHT - THE HEART OF THE DEMOCRATIC STORM -

AFRICOM: THE AMERICAN COLONIAL AND MILITARY OUTPOST FOR AFRICA -

OIL LEAKS SPEAK OF A SLIPPERY IDEOLOGY - THE QUR’AN’S VALUES ARE FOR

APPLICATION - SYNTHETIC CELL – MAN PLAYING GOD OR PLAGIARISING

GOD? - THE ATTACK ON THE FACE VEIL: VEILING POLITICAL MOTIVES

NEWSBITES

2 :: Khilafah Magazine :: June 2010 www.khilafah.eu

KYRGYZSTAN VIOLENCEOver 900 people have been injured, andalmost 70 killed in Kyrgyzstan in earlyJune following ‘ethnic’ riots in theSouthern city of Osh. Only two monthsago over 80 people were killed asKyrgyzstan underwent a bloodyrevolution where the former PresidentBakiyev was thrown out of office replaceby Roza Otunbayeva as Interim PrimeMinister.

Only weeks before the coup RichardHolbrooke, the U.S. envoy to Afghanistan,visited Kyrgyzstan and ‘exchanged viewswith President Bakiyev. Following the visitthe website ‘Russia Today' reported that"the United States had announced $5.5million to assist Kyrgyzstan in building atraining centre for special units to combatterrorism in Batken." ‘ They quotedAlexander Kniazev, director of theregional Bishkek branch of the CISInstitute think-tank about the centre assaying "The United States could use thiscentre to meet its needs in Central Asia.The slogan of fighting terrorism is only apretext to achieve American goals as isthe case in Iraq and Afghanistan", adding"The United States is seeking throughthese projects in Central Asia to challengeand compete with Russia and China in theregion."

As the two old rivals play their new ‘GreatGame’, Muslim bodies remain mere pawnsto be sacrificed.

GERMAN PRESIDENT RESIGNS AFTEREXPOSING REAL INTERESTSGermany's president, Horst Köhler,resigned after he suggested militarydeployments were central to thecountry's economic interests. Köhler, 67,was accused of advocating a form of“gunboat policy” after saying that a largeeconomic power like Germany, with itssignificant global trading interests, mustbe willing to deploy its military abroad. In

a radio interview after a visit to Germantroops in Afghanistan, Köhler, a formerhead of the International Monetary Fund,said that the German public was finallycoming to terms with the concept thattheir country could no longer avoidinvolvement in military missions, whichhelped “protect our interests, for example,free trade routes, or to prevent regionalinstability, which might certainly have anegative effect on our trade, jobs andincome”.

Koehler has been singled out not becauseof these views, which are fully consistentwith German interests abroad, butbecause he has made them public.

DESPITE THE RHETORIC THERELATIONSHIP REMAINSPledging never to forsake the Palestinianpeople, Turkish PM Erdogan likened theIsraeli killings of Palestinians to Turkishcivilian deaths caused by his conflict withKurdish separatist militants.“They killed the babies in their mothers’arms like the terrorists here. They killedinnocent children on their bicycles,” healso called Israel: “a festering boil in theMiddle East”.

Yet Turkey later confirmed that theywould take no action against Israelincluding its numerous military, economicand diplomatic relations when Deputy PMBulent Arinc stated in an interview withthe NTV news channel:“to assume everything involving anothercountry is stopped in an instant, to say wehave crossed you out of our address book,is not the custom of our state.”

The regimes surrounding Israel remainthe strongest defenders of Israel, despitewhat they say to quell public anger andoutrage.

AFGHAN EXIT STRATEGY: NOW IT’S ALLCHANGED…The US has discovered nearly $1 trillionin untapped mineral deposits inAfghanistan, far beyond any previouslyknown reserves and enough tofundamentally alter the Afghan economyand perhaps the Afghan war itself,according to senior American governmentofficials. The previously unknown deposits- including huge veins of iron, copper,cobalt, gold and critical industrial metalslike lithium - are so big and include manyminerals that are essential to modernindustry. US officials believe thatAfghanistan could now be transformedinto one of the most important miningcenters in the world.

Strange that the US which doesn’t reallyhave the time or resources to focus itsefforts on re building what they’vedestroyed, but can readily send geologicalteams to all corners of Afghanistan tosurvey for vital mineral supplies.Will the Americans use this carrot toentice the British and Nato troops to staylonger in Afghanistan?

INDONESIAN PRESIDENT CLAIMSINDONESIA WILL NEVER BE ISLAMICSTATE AGAINPresident Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono hasattacked the concept of the establishmentof an Islamic state governed by Shariahlaw calling on all Indonesians to join thegovernment in combating “terrorism”.“I call for all Indonesian people to jointogether in saving the nation, saving ourpeople, saving us all from the terrorismthreat and from irresponsible parties thatact beyond the limits of humanity,”Yudhoyono said at Halim Perdana Kusumaairport in East Jakarta before leaving foran informal visit to Singapore.By conflating terrorism with striving tore-establish the Islamic state Yudhoyono istrying to turn the Muslim populationagainst the concept of the Islamic state, abattle he is losing.

Only Armies of the Khilafah will take upthe duty to lift the siege of Gaza andliberate Palestine

There have been road convoys andflotillas heading for Gaza for manymonths now, with sincere people -Muslim and non-Muslim - wishing to seethe lifting of the siege, to ease the livesof the elderly, women and children. Theiraim was to draw the attention of theworld to Gaza. Many wished them well.Even some rulers in Muslim landscheered for them.

Yet, on the morning of 31 May, Israel‘greeted’ the latest aid flotilla withbattleships and an armed invasion ininternational waters, murdering 9 of theaid workers and injuring andimprisoning others.

We pray those Muslims who died onthat day are shaheed. But we curse thoserulers who did nothing, or felt it betterto cheer the unarmed aid workers,rather than to send their own trained,well equipped, well armed armies to dotheir duty and end the siege.

It is too little, too late, for the illegitimatecriminal regimes in Muslim lands tocondemn the actions of the criminalIsraeli entity after they did what theyhave done so many times before - inGaza, Jenin, Lebanon, and so on.

It is demeaning for them to call uponthe United Nations Security Council –who created Israel and whoseresolutions Israel ignores – unless it wasmerely to show the hypocrisy of the UNSecurity Council.

It is humiliation to wait for NATO to

leap to action to avenge the murder ofMuslims from Turkey, as they did toavenge the 9/11 deaths by invadingAfghanistan – for which the Turkishgovernment readily sent troops.

It is laughable to see the calls for anArab League Summit to end the siege ofGaza – especially when Hosni Mubarak,the leader of one of the strongest Arabstates – has been at the forefront ofenforcing this murderous siege.

And to suggest that there can be a‘peace process’ with an entity thatmurders and maims (remember theWhite Phosphorus 18 months ago), thatimprisons and keeps a civilianpopulation in poverty and servitude, isbeyond a joke. The conclusion of anysuch peace process would be nothingmore than institutionalising theimprisonment of the Muslims ofPalestine – but calling it a ‘two-statesolution’.

Resistance of occupation is noble – butit is not liberation. Charity andhumanitarian convoys are noble – butthey are not a solution.

Young or old, man or woman, sane orotherwise – everyone knows that endingthe oppression of the people of Gaza orWest Bank cannot happen unless thepolitical entity that is Israel is itselfremoved - and that requires themobilisation of the armies that encircleit. Yet these criminal rulers will never dothat. They are the real Israeli defenceforce. The only way this would happen isif these rulers were removed andreplaced with the sincere leadership ofthe Khilafah. Today, the Ummah lacks theleadership that would take up this duty

and lacks the Khilafah system thatwould account a leader who neglectedsuch a duty.

It is a duty on Muslims to remind tooppose such rulers who aid Israel andneglect to aid the oppressed of Palestinebecause the Messenger of Allah (saw)said ““If the people witness an oppressorand they do not take him by his hand(to prevent him) then they are close toAllah encompassing them in apunishment.” (al-Tirmidhi)

But also, we pray that Muslims who areawakened by these latest murders jointhis growing work around the world forthe Khilafah.

The coming month of Rajab 1431 seesthe 89th anniversary of the destructionof the Uthmani Khilafah – the last timethe Ummah had a leader, and the lasttime when Islam was held in Izzah andMuslims could live in security.

Over the coming month Hizb ut-Tahrirwill be holding events across the worldto remind people of the Islamicobligation of Khilafah – and theoverwhelming need for this Khilafah toend the oppression, occupation andexploitation of Muslims, the degradationof Allah’s deen by His enemies and thenumerous crises around the worldcaused by Capitalism and Kufr.

The events will culminate in theInternational Khilafah Conference inBeirut on the 18th of July, that willaddress the various regional andInternational crises that exist in theWorld today and give the Islamicsolutions to them – and remind theworld of the urgent need of the time.

For it is only the Khilafah that wouldmobilise the armed forces of the State toliberate land and protect Muslims - ‘theImam is a shield’ the Prophet (saw) said(narrated by Imam Muslim). And onlythe Khilafah could establish a rule thatwould harmonise people in the regionand replace the fear and insecurity welive under, with the peace and securityof Islam. �

Khilafah Magazine :: June 2010 :: 3www.khilafah.eu

Dr Abdul Wahid

Editorial

record, many supporters of Israel stillcan’t fathom what all the fuss is about.In their paranoid world, nothing elseexists except the “security” of Israel, forthem any means justifies the end ofoverall Israeli hegemony. To them noother principle is important, torture,barbaric occupation, throwing yourallies under the bus are all justified toprotect the Israeli state. For themsecurity is first, second, and third and ifthe rest of the world doesn’tunderstand this, the solution is to stickto the same brutal policies but justratchet up the public relations. Insteadof reflecting about the devastation theyhave caused to the lives of the dozensof families whose lives they have justdestroyed, Israeli apologists are insteadseeking further retribution.For instance Caroline Glitch writing in

the Jerusalem Post said “it is time forIsrael to launch a counter-offensive. Itsrepresentatives at the UN shoulddemand an investigation into Turkey’sillegal sponsorship of the pro-Hamasflotilla. They should raise such protestsin every UN forum and continue toprotest until they are thrown out of themeetings, and then return the next dayto relaunch their protests. The JusticeMinistry should issue internationalarrest warrants against the flotilla’sorganizers and participants and prepare

indictments against them for trial inIsraeli courts.”

For those who point to Israeli pluralismas a mature democracy, this may exist inthe case of some journalists and othervoices who have bravely criticisedIsrael’s actions, but as for the politicalestablishment there is littledisagreement on Israel’s modusoperandi. In a disgraceful andrepugnant scene at the Israeli Knessetan Arab member Haneen Zoabi whohad been on the actual ship wasrepeatedly heckled and threatened bynumerous Knesset members who called

her a traitor and a terrorist, eventuallyforcing her to cut short her remarks. Itshould be noted that it isn’t justNetanyahu who supported the flotillamassacre. It was ordered by Ehud Barak

defence minister from the “dovish”Labour party and supported to therafters by the west’s favourite“moderate” Tzipi Livni in charge of that“centrist” party Kadima. With such“moderates” like Barak and Livni on theside of Israeli brutality, who actuallyneeds the lunatic far right of Israelipolitics? As Gideon Levy writing inHaaretz says “Israel has no opposition.The last opposition died in 1977. SinceMenachem Begin's rise to power, theopposition has become mute. Ademocracy with no opposition is like afish without water. If anyone stillneeded proof of this, the flotilla episode

provided it - a proven military andpolitical fiasco with worldwide shockwaves…. If anyone, either in Israel orthe rest of the world, thought thisbungling government had analternative, they have been completelymisled.”

Israel’s illegitimacy and isolation growsday by day like a cancer that starts inone organ and slowly seeps through thewhole body. Israel is not just slippingdown the slope to pariahdom but it hasreached there with energy to spare. Theinternational community has givenIsrael a pass for too long, turning ablind eye to atrocities that would makemany of the world’s worst dictatorsblush. Even Israel’s influential Diasporacan no longer defend the indefensible.Many of these from all across thespectrum from politicians toentertainers are either criticising Israel,challenging its propaganda or callingfor sanctions and boycotts. What wouldhave been called piracy by any othernation was not even condemned byBarack Obama; he was too busy


In their paranoid world, nothing else exists exceptthe “security” of Israel, for them any means justifiesthe end of overall Israeli hegemony.

“kicking the ass” of BP. Yet an illegalattack on a NATO member ship killingcivilians by a non NATO membershould have automatically activated acollective response by NATO.Occupying Afghanistan and killingAfghan civilians while ignoring Israel’sbrutal attack on a NATO ship ininternational waters clearly illustratesthat NATO’s agenda has been hijackedby the United States for its ownpolitical ends.

The attempt by Israel to justify itsmassacre on a ship carryinghumanitarian goods to Gaza is itselfsymptomatic of a nation that has lost allperspective. Elite specially trainedIsraeli commandoes with the entireIsraeli navy at their disposal claimedthey were fighting for their lives, cowedby people who had a few knives, clubs

and shaving razors at their disposal:what a pathetic response from one ofthe foremost militaries in the world. Yetthey shouldn’t have been on the ship inthe first place. Complaining aboutillegally boarding a ship in internationalwaters would be a bit like Somalipirates complaining they got a hostilereception from a crew of a ship theywere trying to seize. From Israel’sperspective the goal was to protectGaza from receiving any goods thatwould contravene Israeli security. Yetthey’ve created the threat from Gazawith their brutal occupation ofPalestine since 1948. They implementan apartheid system treatingPalestinians as second class citizens andprisoners in their own lands and thenwonder why people hate them somuch. They create settlements in thewest bank and Jerusalem and then are

amazed when people get angry andwant to reverse the occupation. Israelblames everyone for its insecurity, thePalestinians, Hamas, Turkish NGO’s, Iran,the UN, the organised left, theGoldstone Commission, Hezbollah, theMuslim world, with even some blamingBarack Obama for their misfortune. YetIsrael can blame as many actors as itcan, yet its insecurity is clear for all tosee, it comes from its own barbaricoccupation and its inhumane policies ithas carried out since 1948. It claimsHamas is a terrorist organisation, yetdoesn’t see the irony that its ownfounding fathers were terrorists whoundertook massacres to create Israel inthe first place. It claims to care aboutsecurity yet creates mass insecurity forthe Palestinians; it cites rocket attacksfrom Gaza yet says nothing about itsown occupation and multiple wars ithas initiated in Lebanon and the rest ofthe Arab world.

Israel therefore grows weaker by theday with the strategic situation nowgoing against it. Israel’s strength since1948 has been based on three pillars.The first was to play the “victim” cardto portray itself as the underdog, thecountry that was surrounded by mortalenemies, the Israeli David to its Goliathenemy. For many years, the enemy wasEgypt, then after 1979 it became Syriaand Iraq, now it has become Iran. Theneed for a constant mortal enemy hassome basis, as Israel lacks strategicdepth and cannot afford to lose a majorconflict. Yet Israel has taken advantageof this to the point that it can possess acovert nuclear arsenal and receive nodiplomatic sanction while Iran whichhas no verifiable arsenal can becontinuously punished for an allegedattempt to gain such a capability. Aspart of this “victim” strategy, there is aconcerted strategy by Israel and itssupporters in the media, think tanksand foreign political medium to label allits detractors as anti Semitic, orterrorists or hopelessly naive, or allthree. This has been a successfulstrategy to date as Israel has largelyreceived token slaps on the wrist forwhat other nations would never havegot away with. This strategy was again


executed in the flotilla massacre, whenIsraeli’s PR machine across the globetried in a vain attempt to portray theTurkish organisation behind the

humanitarian aid as having links toHamas and Al Qaida and that much ofthe world’s reaction was born out ofanti-Semitism or indifference to the fateof the Jewish people. Yet this pillar isnow eroding, with much of the worldnow seeing Israel as the aggressor notthe victim. Many parts of theinternational community no longer arecowed by Israeli attempts to censorcriticism of its actions through the falsecloak of anti-Semitism.

The second pillar is to projectformidable military strength to deteranyone from even thinking about takingIsrael on. Israel has relied on its militaryto keep any nation from even thinkingabout attacking it. Israel is a small stateeffectively surrounded by much largerstates. Historically the land currentlyoccupied by Israel has not remainedindependent from the major powers.Whether it was the Babylonians, theRomans, the Persians or the Khilafah,the land has usually been part of amuch larger power. Israeli strategistsunderstand that Israel’s geographiclocation and strategic situation isprecarious and that havingoverwhelming military strength is notjust a must but a necessity. Yet recentevents have shown that the IsraeliDefence Force (IDF) is showing deepsigns of vulnerability. The 2006 warwith Lebanon showed Israel’s inabilityto defeat Hezbollah. Israel’s 2009 waron Gaza showed it could not defeatHamas. Across the region, countrieslike Turkey, Pakistan and Iran aregrowing stronger which further negatesIsrael’s military superiority. ThoughIsrael has a nuclear monopoly in theMiddle East, this capability is vastlyexaggerated. Even if Israel was foolishenough and the Americans allowed it touse such a capability, the whole of the

Middle East would be contaminatedwith the fallout including Israel itselfand oil would rise to a $1000 a barrel.

The third pillar is also eroding. Israelonce an asset to the internationalcommunity now is largely becoming aliability. Most of the Muslim world anddeveloping world has already turnedagainst Israel. Now Europe isincreasingly hostile to Israel’s brutaloccupation. Even in the United Stateswhere support for Israeli policies issometimes greater than even in Israelitself, there are major chinks emerging.Though the main Israeli lobby inWashington is still able to keepAmerican politicians in line, somestrategists and key voices in theAmerican military now view Israel as animpediment to furthering US strategicobjectives in the Middle East and thewider Muslim world. Israel’s brutalpolicies are damaging America’sreputation as well as its own. CentcomCommander Gen. David Petraeus notedin congressional testimony that theperception that the United Statesfavours Israel breeds anti-Americanism.

In a devastating report in January ofthis year sent to Chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen,Petraeus concluded that the US alliancewith an intransigent Israel wasincreasingly undermining America’sstanding and influence in the Arab andMuslim worlds and was endangeringthe United States. As analyst Mark Perrystated in March in Foreign Policy “Thereare important powerful lobbies inAmerica: the NRA, the AmericanMedical Association, the lawyers and theIsraeli lobby. But no lobby is asimportant, or as powerful, as the U.S.military.” Vice President Biden was alsoreported in the Israeli press as givingunprecedented warnings to Israel’s topofficials in March when he said “This isstarting to get dangerous for us. Whatyou’re doing here undermines the

security of our troops who are fightingin Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan”. Nowonder the chief of Mossad, MeirDagan, was quoted as saying to aKnesset committee that “Israel isgradually turning from an asset to theUnited States to a burden”. Indeed theonly major constituency in Americawho still supports Israel as an article offaith is the neoconservative right whosee Israel as its proxy in its perpetualwar against Islam. Yet as the private USgroup Stratfor states “Israel is not acountry that can survive in isolation…The second Israel becomes a liability tothat patron, however the country’svulnerability soars and its survivabilitycomes into question.”

The Muslim world therefore faces astrategic choice, to continue with thefailed peace process, which doesn’tprovide peace to the Palestinians whilstproviding a long drawn out process forIsrael’s benefit. And despite Obama’spromise of change in his Cairo speechin 2009, American foreign policy hasnot changed one iota in its protectionof Israel. Or they act to do somethingindependently themselves. Demography,legitimacy, history, and justice is allagainst Israel. It is time for the Muslimworld to press the reset button in itscosy relationship with Israel of toughrhetoric for their publics, alongsideprivate warmth and secret trade deals.

The Muslim world now needs todevelop a unified response which canonly come through the establishment ofthe Khilafah. Relying on the west tosolve the Palestinian oppression afterBosnia, Rwanda and Iraq is as naive as itis flawed. The west is complicit withIsrael in its brutal occupation. It is onlythe Muslim world by marshalling itscombined resources that can solve thePalestinian problem by reversing Israel’soccupation, providing security for allcitizens irrespective of their creed andproviding the stability the region sorichly deserves.�


“Israel is gradually turning from an asset to theUnited States to a burden”.

The British Parliament is known as the‘mother of all parliaments’ and arguably ledthe way for democracies in the modernday. Elections for the parliament were heldin May 2010 leading to the formation of anew government. We take an objectivelook at these events.

Background to the ElectionsFor over 4 weeks the British media wentinto over-drive as they covered theelections. Britain is still barely recoveringfrom a recession caused by its disastrousCapitalist financial system; there is recordmistrust of politicians and cynicism aboutthe tribal nature of party politics in Britain;the country is still engaged in anunpopular military occupation inAfghanistan; and there are growing socialproblems that society seems unwilling toconfront.

Despite all of this, by the time the electioncampaign was officially declared in April2010, the intense campaigning that startedsome months before in January 2010

seemed to have created a sense ofweariness amongst many ordinary voters.

Media Hype and EntertainmentIt was against this background that themedia launched an almighty publicity pushto generate interest. The coverage was24/7, sometimes attempting to create newsstories when, in truth, there was nosubstance. It seemed like somenewspapers wrote as much about theclothing of the candidates or their wivesthan their policies. Arguably, the mostfamous episode or manufacturing an‘important’ story was when former PrimeMinister Gordon Brown had a difficultdiscussion with an elderly woman whomhe had spoken to politely in public, but inprivate (and unbeknown to him beingrecorded by a TV microphone left on afterthe interview) he confessed to an aide thatthe discussion had been a disaster and thathe thought she was a bigot. It is not ‘news’to most people that politicians are two-faced, but the media still managed 2-3 dayscoverage over it.

The attempt to generate interest in theelection peaked with the three set-piecePrime Ministerial debates between thecandidates, which is a new phenomenonin Britain. The coverage of these seemed toawaken some interest in politics. But thediscussion afterwards was about style morethan substance; about who looked best oncamera, their body language and theirability to look at the camera.

All of this reinforced the view that themedia coverage – debates and all – seemedas much about entertainment, as they didabout the serious problems that Britainfaced. It was like political ‘pop-idol’ (a UKTV entertainment show), followed by apenalty shoot out when the electionresulted in a hung-parliament (i.e. no partywon overall control in the parliament).

Why this ‘style over substance’?The question arises why the British mediaplaces so much image and style overpolicies and ideas? There are severalpossible reasons for this.

It has been said, by the politicalcommentator Noam Chomsky, that themedia is able to manufacture consent forthe political status quo and desensitiseordinary people to serious issues: “Thebeauty of our system is that it isolateseverybody. Each person is sitting alone infront of the tube, you know. It's very hardto have ideas or thoughts under thosecircumstances.”

But aside from this, this election illustratedone fact very clearly: that there was nosignificant difference between the differentparties in their policies. They all supportedthe on-going occupation of Afghanistan; allsupport Israel; all believe in favouring big

The Heart of theDemocratic Storm

www.khilafah.eu8 :: Khilafah Magazine :: June 2010

Dr Abdul Wahid

business more than the ordinary man andwoman, especially in their decisions overtaxation and public spending cuts; they allbelieve in ‘civil partnerships’ – where aman can ‘marry’ a man or a woman ‘marry’a woman.

All the parties are now socially liberal andeconomically liberal – differing only indegrees and in styles of management. Asthe political commentator Peter Hitchensput it, when referring to the Conservativeparty replacing the Labour party as thelargest party: “Well, congratulations boysand girls, you've 'got rid of GordonBrown' and how much better do you feelthan you did when he was there? Hightaxation gone, has it? Grammar schoolsback, are they? Political correctness hasbeen removed from public life, has it? TheEU has been told to clear off, has it? Massimmigration is stopping, is it? Crime anddisorder are under control, are they?Marriage has been saved, has it? Britainhas pulled out of the idiot war inAfghanistan, has it? The rape of theconstitution is over, is it?” - mocking hisreaders who hated the old government’spolicies, which the new governmentwould merely continue.

Ideology first, then PartyBritain has one ideology, secular liberalvalues in its political and social life, acapitalist shape to its economy, andcolonial foreign policy, regardless of theparty that is in power. If there was once awider divide in British Democracy, forcedby the existence of the Communist SovietUnion, there is none now – just as it wasbefore the Communist Soviet Union cameinto being.

This may not be a one-party state but it is aone-ideology state, whose parties’ viewsare very similar. Dominic Lawson, writingin the Independent newspaper said: ‘somesharp-eyed academic observers of Britishpolitics argue that in the post-ideologicalera, what remains of political battle issimply a surface conflict betweenidentical middle-class elites of onlynotionally different outlooks. This is theview of Dr David Runciman, who arguesthat British politics now closely resemblesits form during the 18th century, echoingLewis Namier's analysis of the battles ofthat time between the Whigs and theTories. Namier wrote that the apparentconflicts of principle between those two

great parties were illusory, and that thiswas just a battle for power betweencliques: "the political life of the periodcould be fully described without everusing a party denomination." ‘

Why have Conservative and LiberalDemocratic Parties formed a Coalition?There are multiple reasons for this, madepossible by the narrow policy gapbetween the parties.

One reason is that the party with thelargest vote – the Conservatives (alsocalled the Tories) – did not win an outrightmajority and winning power was essential– even if they had to make someconcessions.

Another is that any party in power will beforced to take such unpopular measures inthe current economic climate, it would begood to share the blame.

Governor of the Bank of England, MervynKing, warned before the election thatpublic anger over coming austerity cutswill be so severe that whoever wins thenext election will be out of power for ageneration. So, it suits the MachiavellianConservatives to have some political cover.It is surely not by accident that new PrimeMinister puts his former rival’s name firstwhen he refers to the coalition as ‘Liberal-Democrat Conservative coalition; or thathe has give that party the Cabinet positionthat will be responsible for making thecuts – Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

One other reason is that Cameron has agood measure of what people want – thatis a culture change in politics: more co-operation and less overt hostility. Somehave compared Cameron’s seizing of thisopportunity, against the desires of many inhis own party, with his hero andpredecessor Benjamin Disraeli who extendvoting rights to many who were previouslydisenfranchised in order to achieve power.

Will this new arrangement restore trust inDemocracy?The current evidence is that it will not.Despite a high profile, show-biz,enthusiastic media frenzy, 35% of peoplestill did not vote in the election. Moreover, no party has serious solutionsfor Britain’s problems: a broken society –to quote David Cameron, the new PrimeMinister; a broken political system – to

quote Nick Clegg, the new Deputy-PrimeMinister; a financial and economic crisis,that may still turn into a currency crisis –to name but a few of the problems.

Yet – for some - Muslims, watching fromafar in our countries, are supposed to lookto London and Washington as theirpolitical ‘qibla’, supposed to revere, prayand hope for democracy to solve theirproblems!

It is a vain hope. If Muslims were oncebesotted, they are no longer. Indeed, norare non Muslims. The promise ofdemocracy is not sunshine, but politicaland social thunderstorms. The formereditor of the Times newspaper SimonJenkins wrote in April 2010: “Democracyin both America and Britain is comingunder scrutiny these days. Quite apartfrom the antics of MPs and congressmen,it is said to be sliding towards oligarchy,with increasing overtones of autocracy.Money and its power over technology aremaking elections unfair. The military-industrial complex is as powerful as ever,having adopted "the menace of globalterrorism" as its casus belli. Lobbying andcorruption are polluting the governmentprocess. In a nutshell, democracy is not ingood shape. How strange to choose thismoment to export it, least of all tocountries that have never experienced itin their history. The west not only exportsthe stuff, it does so with massive, thuggishviolence, the antithesis of how self-government should mature in any polity.The tortured justification in Iraq andAfghanistan is that elections willsomehow sanctify a "war againstterrorism" waged on someone else's soil.The resulting death and destruction havebeen appalling. Never can an end,however noble, have so failed to justifythe means of achieving it.”

He is right. And never has the need forhumanity been more for the Muslims toembrace the Islamic Khilafah as a system,and to show the world real justice andhow a real government should be run – forthe people, by the systems of Allah, by theman whom the people have entrustedwith authority to execute His (SWT) laws.�

www.khilafah.eu Khilafah Magazine :: June 2010 :: 9

Africa is a very rich continent. Notsimply in terms of abundant resourcesbut in its geographic significance also,almost the entire continent isstrategically important. Sir Henry MortonStanley, the man who opened up theCongo region to European exploitation

during the 1873-74 Anglo-Ashanti wars,possibly gave the best explanation of thegenesis of the conflict. He declared thatAfrica “is too rich a neighbour to be leftwith his riches.”

Eighty percent of new oil reserves

discovered between 2001 and 2004came from West Africa, most recentlyfrom the Gulf of Guinea and Uganda. In September 2002, the New York Timesran a headline stating “In courting Africa,U.S. likes the Dowry: oil”. It quoted thethen Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham,who said, “Energy from Africa plays anincreasing important role in our energysecurity.”

John Ghazvinian in his book Untapped;“The Scramble for Africa’s Oil” point’sout that not only is African oil of highquality, it also bears other significantpolitical advantages; most Africancountries are not OPEC members, theiroil is not owned by powerful state oilcompanies and the oil is largely offshore,which means “that even if a civil war orviolent insurrection breaks out onshore(always a concern in Africa), the oilcompanies can continue to pump out oilwith little likelihood of sabotage and/ornationalist fervour getting in the way.”In 2007, countries like Nigeria surpassedSaudi Arabia as the largest suppliers ofoil to the United State. It is anticipatedthat by 2015 the U.S. expects to importmore oil from Africa than from the entirePersian Gulf. In that same year PresidentBush announced the creation of the U.S.Africa Command, known as AFRICOM,which would be fully operational bySeptember 30, 2008.


Abdulwahab Jibrin

AFRICOM: The American colonial andmilitary outpost for Africa

However, most African states haverejected the idea of establishing apermanent base for AFRICOM, they seeit as a threat to their sovereignty and amove to further militarise Africa,maintaining that the last thing Africaneeds is more militarisation.Consequently, AFRICOM is still stationedin America’s previous European colonyof Stuttgart in Germany.

Furthermore, the fear of US designs onAfrica harboured by ordinary Africansgoes back to the slave trade when acaptive was sold and resold as he madehis way from the interior up to thecoastal point of embarkation like the‘Point of no return’ in Cape Coast,Ghana. All the while this was considereda form of trade. However, this is far from‘trade’ because the unjust process bywhich victims of slavery were obtainedon African soil was through warfare,trickery, banditry and kidnapping. If theUS is permitted to establish a base forAFRICOM, it will be well placed todeploy similar destructive and deceptivetactics in usurping Africa’s richresources.

During a Q & A session with U.S.Senators, the Commander for AFRICOM,General William Ward gave the ‘textbook’response for its creation, he said; “I seethe establishment of AFRICOM as awonderful opportunity to efficiently andeffectively apply the elements of U.Snational power in ways that help theAfricans develop and implementsolutions to African concerns.”

Conversely, when asked in an interviewwith Wall Street Journal writer GregJaffe, he decrypted the earlier message;“A key mission for U.S. forces (in Africa)would be to insure that Nigeria’soilfields, which in the future couldaccount for as much as 25 percent of allU.S oil imports, are secure.”The continued deployment of militaryforces to secure procurement and tocontrol the global delivery system offossil fuel is a great sign of desperationand attempts to further present it as ahumanitarian guard in the war on Terroris far from credible. In addition, the aimis to keep an eye on Africa’s Muslimpopulation, which is above 400 millionaccording to the Pew-Research Centre.The United States “equates terrorismwith Islam”, said one senior Kenyandiplomat, and few African governmentswanted to be seen as inviting U.S.surveillance on their own people.” Inactuality, the causes of anti-Americanterrorism are better linked withAmerican Foreign policy rather thanhatred of Western values.

Presently, camp Lemonier in Djiboutihouses 2,400 US personnel who areengaged in counterinsurgencycampaigns in Mali, Uganda, Yemen,Somalia (where it is involved in a proxywar with Ethiopia) and as far as Pakistan,Via unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UVAs)they savagely kill innocent pregnantwomen and children.

To allow the United States achieve full-spectrum military dominance over Africawill be one of the greatest crimes of the21st century, on a scale far worse thanthe Slave Trade.

Africa needs only to look to the Far Eastto witness the consequences of allowingAmerican military boots a foothold onthe continent. The incumbent JapanesePrime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, duringhis campaign for office promised thepeople to completely remove thecontroversial U.S. base on the island ofOkinawa. On the contrary, when recentlyvisiting the island, Mr Hatoyamaconceded that “realistically speaking, it isimpossible” to fully relocate it.Overwhelming pressure from Obama’s

administration had come to bear,sending the clear and decoded messagethat the U.S. would not accept thedemocratic wishes of the island ofOkinawa.

Currently, Africa desperately needs goodgovernance. In the past it possessedstrong yet generous leaders like MansaMusa who was remembered for hisovergenerous pilgrimage to Mecca,where he gave out so much gold that itdepressed the value in Egypt and causedit to fall for 12 years. He implementedIslam for 25 years, bringing prosperityand stability to Mali. E.W. Bovillcommented in his book ‘The GoldenTrade of the Moors, [1958]’ that Mali was“remarkable both for its extent and forits wealth and a striking example of thecapacity of the Negro for politicalorganisation”.

The first declared revelation of the HolyQuran in the cave at Hira was in 610 AH,and four years later, when thegovernment in Mecca harshlypersecuted the Muslims, a party of themmigrated to Abyssinia. Mecca then sentemissaries, laden with choicest presentsfor the Negus, his nobles and chiefs, toget the persons in exile returned toMecca. On hearing the clear message ofIslam from the Muslim exiles the Negussecretly accepted Islam and refused therequest of the Meccan envoys andtreated the Muslims with honour,pledging his protection to them. Bothcrestfallen envoys of Mecca had to leaveAbyssinia in great shame while theMuslims continued to live there in peaceand security for 13 years until theyfinally left for Medina.

Today, the Muslims in Africa invite therest of the Ummah spread across theglobe to establish Islam. They will offerthe same pledge given by theirforefathers to protect Islam and theUmmah once again.�


Not an exceptionAfter facing one of its worst financial crisis,the United States is facing its worstenvironmental disaster. Are these lapsesand accidents or are they a feature of asystem? It is well known that the recentfinancial crisis was part of a century oldbusiness cycle that regularly (every decadeon average) forgives the sinners bypunishing the innocent. The recent oil leakcan be considered part of the damninganthropogenic (man made) environmentalimpact of the last century. The Gulf War oilspill was 10 times larger, but received nextto no cleanup operation on its 800kmshoreline, leaving a long termenvironmental impact. The Ixtoc 1 oil spillin the Gulf of Mexico was 5 times larger,took 10 months to cap, and the Mexicangovernment-owned company Pemexavoided paying compensation invokingsovereign immunity. All these pale incomparison to the Niger Delta catastrophe.Despite occurring almost on a daily basisfor the past 50 years (including ongoingleaks even during this month), the Nigerian

ecosystem never received the media,political and corporate attention that theUS based leak has received. Experiencing7,000 spills in 3 decades with about 300every year in recent times (approx. 200times the current BP leak), the Nigerianlocals have become accustomed to thedouble standards in the rhetoric of thePresident and steps taken by BP to protectthe Louisiana shoreline. Yet, similar to thefinancial crisis, the steps taken by both theUS government and the corporationsredress neither the causes nor the effectsof their own problem.

Negligence and complicityOn April 20, the Deepwater Horizonplatform located of New Orleans, explodedkilling 11 people and sank 2 days later. Theplatform is a property of Transocean and isleased to BP. The spill is estimated toeclipse the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill onthe Alaskan coast. BP and the USadministration have claimed that anaccident of this magnitude could not havebeen predicted, however new revelations

suggest clear evidence of negligence andeven criminality. BP internal documentsshow concerns of casing collapse raised asearly as June 2009. The company howeverwent ahead despite violating safetypolicies and design standards. Even prior tothe explosion, signs of problems wereindicated by repeated release of gas fromthe well, and leaking fluids which limit theproper operation of the device. The USMinerals Management Services after initialdecline, approved permission to delayregulatory fortnightly tests of the blowoutpreventer.

After the explosion, Transocean’s lawyersforced rig labourers to forfeit rights to suein exchange for $5,000, and a BP officialrefused to provide testimony using hisFifth Amendment right not to incriminatehimself. BP admitted that drillingoperations were 43 days behind schedule,each day costing them $533,000 to use therig from Transocean. BP made Transoceanagree to modify and expedite its usualprocedures and sequence for drilling andwell capping. BP also went againstwarnings of severe gas flow problem bycement contractor Halliburton. BP’sdecisions to bypass standard practiceswere all approved by the US governmentMinerals Management Service.

Capitalist responseFrom the beginning, the Obamaadministration put the perpetrator BP incommand of halting the spill and thecleanup, insisting that only BP had theexpertise to handle this situation. Thisfollowing several debacles, where genuineefforts were expectedly compromised byprofit motives. BP misled the public andthe administration by hiding videoevidence of the magnitude of spill,claiming impact would be modest. Despitebeing ready to join cleanup efforts, BP only

Oil leaks speak of aslippery ideology


Abdullah Ahmad

hired a fraction of the Gulf Coastfisherman (rendered jobless by the spill)on the condition that they do not sue fordamages. BP used large volumes of achemical dispersant sold by Nalco(dominated by executives close to BP andExxon), that is more toxic and lesseffective. More effective methods such asabsorbent boom lines instead of plasticbooms have been ruled out due to theircost. But this did not stop BP spending$50m on image management throughtelevision advertising, and a potential$10bn in dividends this quarter. Also $1bnin dividends was handed to Transoceanshareholders, while fighting to limitliabilities for those 11 killed in the

explosion to $27m. Any reader can nowappreciate what was to come from theNovember 2009 Times Online headline:“Tony Hayward makes his mark on BP:Ruthless cuts by the new boss haveproduced results in higher than expectedprofits”.

The US government is amongst the bestplaced to solve this crisis, as it is able toinstantly draw from competent researchorganisations and industry, not to mentionits state agencies that are meant to lookafter this. The film director who artfullydocumented the Titanic at more than twicethe depth of the current operation is notamused at the BP exclusivity and appallingdeep-sea monitoring of the spill. Havinghad his offer to help rejected, JamesCameron quipped “I know really, really,really smart people that work typically atdepths much greater than what that well isat”, and added that “The government reallyneeds to have its own independent abilityto go down there and image the site,survey the site and do its owninvestigation”.

The influence of private businesses ongovernment and regulation is well known,and the relationship of the oil industrywith governments is particularly cosy. The1989 Exxon Valdez catastrophe resultedfrom oil gushing from a ship ripped openon an Alaskan reef, which prompted theCongress to demand all oil tankers to have

double hulls. The oil industry lobby waspowerful enough to relax this requirementfor 25 years, i.e. until 2015 single-hulledcarriers can ply US waters. Requirementsfor remote control shut-off devices as back-up systems in case of spills, stricter safetyprocedures, and environmental impactstudies were all waived in the last decadeby regulators at the behest of the industry.The outrage and poor public ratings of theresponse to the disaster is putting pressureon the US government to take control ofthe spill. Having supported deregulation orself-regulation across the sectors aimed atremoving limitations in profit seeking, thegovernment may still be reticent inreversing the trend, as this could lead to

similar calls to regulate other sectors of theeconomy. Given the poor response to theKatrina disaster and the disproportionatefunding of banks and wars, one can beforgiven to lose faith in the existing systemin taking care of the welfare of its owncitizens, let alone the rest of the world.

The Islamic perspectiveThe Islamic system is fundamentallydifferent in treating needs, aspirations andresources. While other ideologies are man-made, subject to deficient logic andevolution guided by vested interests, theIslamic system is revealed by the Creator(swt). The Islamic economic systemprovides a comprehensive perspective ondistribution, ownership, transactions andthe growth of wealth. Within thisperspective there is the economic system -an unchanging set of rules that define thescope and boundaries of economicactivities; and economic science – bestpractices in the domain of science andmanagement that can be adopted toenhance the fulfilment of man’s needs andaspirations.

The handling of the Deep Horizon oil leakis yet another reminder of the true coloursof capitalism. It is also an opportunity torecognize how the Islamic system not onlyprevents the causes but also enableseffective treatment of problems as theyarise in the interest of all. The following aresome of measures that relate to this

problem:

• Non-depleting minerals and publicutilities are public properties in Islam, andhence are not subject to privatisation.

• The state is obliged to take care of anydisaster that affects the public at thehighest level and is not left up to thedevices of a private party.

• The potential for collusion betweengovernment and business is prevented bythe ruling system that is independent ofthe private sector.

• In the absence of oil monopolies, andintellectual property, high quality scientificand technological development of cleanersources of energy would be encouraged,and directly incentivised by the state toreduce environmental degradation.

• Interest-free transactions limit theappreciation of costs and discourage timediscounting, over-consumption and overexploitation.

• Company structures and tradingregulations do not allow for speculativepublic trading, where businesses can raisemarket capitalisation artificially, and can bebrought down to its knees merely byperception.

Therefore the scenario of the oil industrywould be entirely different to what peopleexperience today. They are publicproperties, which are managed by thestate, and revenues are spent on publicneeds. On the contrary today, oil fields are“owned” by Princes and corporations, therevenues from which are rarely spent onpublic needs and development. The pricesof fuel would also reflect appropriate costsof extraction, refining and distribution.While extraction costs approximately$0.012 a litre, current prices exceed $1.8per litre in the UK, the majority of whichcomprises duty and taxes. The Muslimworld possesses a majority of oil resources,however it lacks refining capacity and evenlacks sovereignty over extraction, use andsale of its resources. The oil scenario aloneis sufficient to illustrate the dramatictransformation that would be brought bythe forthcoming Islamic state.�


The state is obliged to take care of any disaster that affectsthe public at the highest level and is not left up to thedevices of a private party.

The Qur’an has a special status forMuslims. We treat it with great honour andrespect, aware that it is Allah’s word and aMercy from Him, most high. “And Wereveal of the Qur’an that which is ahealing and a mercy for believers.” [TMQ17:82]Muhammad (saw) is reported to have said“The best ‘ibadah for my Ummah isreading the Qur’an”

But this Qur’an is not merely a lovelysound, nor only a great symbol of Islam,but it also contains Allah’s commands andprohibitions.

For example, Allah says: “O you whobelieve! Fasting is prescribed for you as itwas prescribed for those before you, thatyou may become Al-Muttaqûn” [2:183]

Yet, Allah also says: “O you who believe!Al-Qisâs (the Law of Equality inpunishment) is prescribed for you in case

of murder: the free for the free, the slavefor the slave, and the female for thefemale.” [2:178]

We respond to some rules in the Qur’anwith great energy and enthusiasm,motivated by our taqwa, like the Ayah offasting. But, sadly there is little evidencefor existence for the command of Allah forQisas, using the same form of words asaforementioned command for fasting.

We respond to one with great energy, butfor the most part the rules of the other areforgotten, or selectively abused in parts ofthe world.

Qisas is Allah’s solution and punishmentfor murder. Its absence means murder isnot deterred or dealt with around theworld as Allah ordained.

It is not that most Muslims have beenwillingly neglectful of this Ayah, yet we

feel powerless to do anything. Such anAyah remains ‘theoretical’ until a stateexists willing to implement it.

Islam has made the circulation ofcurrency between all the citizens anobligation, and it has forbidden therestricting of such circulation to a certaingroup of people to the exclusion ofothers. If there were a wide gap withinsociety among the individuals in terms ofsecuring the needs, and if society neededto be rebuilt, the state would be underobligation to redress the situation byhanding out financial assistance to thosein need, until these basic needs aresatisfied, and until a balance in thedistribution is struck.

How can this fair distribution be achievedwithout a central leadership for theMuslims? Again, this command can onlybe fulfilled by a Khalifah, otherwise it toois only theoretical. Today, the wealth ofthe world is highly concentrated in thehands of a few. A few selfish, irresponsibleindividuals have caused fiscal chaos, yet itis the poor who suffer worst from theirdealings. Never before did we hear ofmothers committing the murder of herown children to escape the cripplinghunger. People in Pakistan would pridethemselves a decade ago - although therewas poverty, no one ever starved to deathon their streets, unlike in India next door.Now we hear of Muslims phoning muftison Pakistan TV shows, asking if it isallowed to commit suicide to avoid thehunger!

Islam has ensured the effective


Yahya Nisbet

The Qur’an’s valuesare for application


distribution by restricting the methods ofownership and the method of disposal, andalso by offering the needy financialassistance.

"And let those who hoard gold and silverand do not spend them in the way ofAllah know that a severe and painfulpunishment is awaiting them." [TMQ 9-34]

Owning and saving is not dangerous to theeconomy, on the contrary, it helps increasethe economic wealth of the community as

well as the individual. The danger lies inthe hoarding of monies by someindividuals with very large fortunes, for thestandard of incomes drops in this case,unemployment spreads and peoplebecome poor.

If a person were to hoard a sum of money,he would be in fact taking money off themarket, and this would lead to a decreasein spending and to the decrease in theincome of persons who would have haddealings with that person, had he nothoarded that sum of money; this in turnwould lead to a decrease in production, forthe demand for goods decreases, and thisin turn leads to unemployment and anoverall economic decline. Therefore, thehoarding of money leads definitely tounemployment and to economic declinedue to the decline in people's incomes.

The difference between money hoardingand saving is that the former meansaccumulating money without purpose, itmeans taking money off the market,whereas the latter, i.e. saving, meansaccumulating money for a purpose, such assaving for a house, or for a wedding, or toset up a business and so on. This type ofmoney accumulating does not affect themarket nor does it affect the employmentcycle, for it does not lead to taking moneyoff the market, but it means saving up asum in order to spend it at a given time,thus the money will circulate again once itis invested, there is therefore no harm insaving, unlike hording of money for no real

purpose.So, how can this hoarding be preventedwithout a central leadership for theMuslims? Again, this command can only befulfilled by a Khalifah, otherwise thecommand is only theoretical.

Many Muslims are used to giving zakatvoluntarily to the mosque. No one checksto make sure the right amount has beengiven, or whether some have neglected togive any at all. However, Allah (SWT)ordered a different method in the Qur’an,that zakat be taken by the State and

allocated according to the Quran. This wasimplemented by the Prophet (saw) and theKhulafah Rashidun.

“Take Sadaqah from their wealth inorder to purify them and sanctify themwith it, and invoke Allâh for them. Verily!Your invocations are a source of securityfor them; and Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.” [TMQ 9:103]

The Messenger (saw) used to appointgovernors, workers and collectors to takethe Sadaqah from the owners of wealthjust as he would appoint estimators(Khurraas) to estimate the harvest of thepalm and grape trees.

Ibn Sireen narrated: “Sadaqah used to bepaid to the Prophet or whoever he hadordered, to Abu Bakr or whoever heordered, to ‘Umar and whoever he ordered,to Uthman and whoever he ordered.” This applies even if there are shortcomingsin the implementation. Suhayl b. Abi Salihnarrated from his father who said: “I askedSa’ad b. Abi Waqqas, Abu Hurayra, Abu Saidal-Khudry and ibn Umar: ‘This ruler isdoing what you can see (of evil). Should Ipay my Zakat to them?’ He said: They allsaid; ‘Pay it to them.’” Ibn ‘Umar said: “Giveit to whoever Allah put in charge of youraffairs. Whoever is good, it is for his ownself and whoever is evil, it is againsthimself.”

This verse and so many hadith talk abouttaking the zakat:

In the Hadith of Abu Musa and Muaz whenthe Prophet (saw) sent them to Yemen toteach people the matters of their deen; hesaid: ““Don’t take Sadaqah except fromthese four: Barley, wheat, raisins and dates.”

Makhul said: “When the Messenger of Allahsent evaluators he would say: ‘‘Be lenient,for there are fruits that are lost due to badweather, fruits that fall down and thosethat are used by the eaters.’”

It is not allowed for the Sadaqah collectorto aim to take the best of the crops andfruits in Sadaqah due to the Prophet’sstatement: ““Avoid the best of their wealth.”

So, who is to do this taking, if not theKhalifah?

Many well known verses of the Qur’anmention how the ruling should beaccording to Allah’s rules. Many ahadithexplicitly oblige the Muslims to appoint aKhalifah. The examples mentioned above,although not containing a directly stated(mantooq) command to have a ruler rulingby Islam, do oblige it by implication(iqtidaa). The implication is much a part ofrule as the mentioned rule itself. It is not tobe neglected, just as the other rules thatcan be fulfilled individually are not to beneglected. So, while we honour this Qur’anwhen we read it, and when we respondenergetically to some of its rules, we aredishonouring it when we are lessenthusiastic to appoint a Khalifah to applythe rest of its rules, as necessitated by thewording and nature of the Qur’anic rulesthemselves. Such neglected rules havedefined for Muslims our high values, butremain as such without a method ofimplementation practically in our lives.That method is there for us to see; we justhave to apply it.

"So, Do you believe in part of the bookand reject part of it? And what is thereward of those who do so save ignominyin the life of the world, and on the Day ofResurrection they will be consigned to themost grievous doom" [TMQ 2:85]

..while we honour this Qur’an when we read it, and when werespond energetically to some of its rules, we are dishonouring itwhen we are less enthusiastic to appoint a Khalifah to apply therest of its rules...

loses its ability to reprogramme arecipient cell. Using the softwareanalogy, Venter's team will delete lines ofcode one by one until the software stopsworking thereby identifying the essentiallines of code required for life.

Societal reactionThe reaction of western society to thislandmark research has been typicallyextreme. Newspaper columns have beenfull of varied opinions ranging fromhysteria claiming that Venter is playingGod at the peril of humanity to accoladebordering on worship ascribing divinestatus to Venter for creating new life!No doubt, this technology raises ethicalquestions as in the near future it will bepossible to engineer or reprogrammebacteria on a scale not achieved before,the long term consequences for life onthis planet of which are not possible topredict should such bacteria be releasedinto the environment.

So how should Muslims view Venter'swork and what does Islam say regardingthe development of such technologies?Firstly, we should understand what hasand has not been achieved by theresearch of Venter's team. Venter's teamhas definitely not created a new lifeform but has reprogrammed an existinglife form into another very closelyrelated existing life form. The syntheticgenome built by Venter's team was notoriginal but a replica of an existinggenome found in nature and is syntheticonly in the method of construction andnot in informational content.

That is, Venter's team did not write thesoftware, they merely copied it.Furthermore, Venter's team did notsynthesize the recipient cell into whichthe synthetic genome was transplanted,they used a closely related bacteriumfound in nature. Therefore, Venter's teamcopied the software from one computerand transferred it onto anothercomputer, a practise that is illegal in thewestern capitalist economy. Therefore, itis more accurate to describe Venter'steam's claim to having created the firstsynthetic cell not as "playing God" butrather as "plagiarising God!"

As Muslims we believe that Allah (SWT)is the supreme Creator who created theuniverse from nothing and who sustainsit through a system of fixed universallaws governing the behaviour of matter.He (SWT) created life within theframework of the universal laws and notoutside of them. Allah says in translation:"Wonderful Originator of the heavensand the earth when He decreeth athing, He Says unto it only: Be and itis." [Al-Baqara, 2:117]

"Behold! In the creation of the heavensand the earth; in the alternation of thenight and the day; in the sailing ofships through the ocean, for the profitof mankind; in the rain which Allahsends down from the skies, and the lifewhich He gives therewith to an earththat is dead; in the beasts of all kindsthat He scatters through the earth; inthe change of the winds, and the cloudswhich they trail like their slavesbetween the sky and the earth; hereindeed are Signs for a people that arewise" [Al-Baqara, 2:164]

These verses encourage humanity todiscover Allah (SWT) through His (SWT)creation and experiments such as thoseperformed by Venter's team help us tobetter understand Allah’s (SWT) creation.The chemical process of life within thecell also operates according to thesefixed universal laws such as the systemsthat read the instructions within agenome and translate them intochemical life. Therefore, the work ofVenter's team has uncovered some newaspects of these laws and confirmedsome others, while the technologydeveloped works according to thesesystems and laws created by Allah (SWT).Venter's research has in factdemonstrated that even the simplestbacterial life form is in reality incrediblycomplex, requiring hundreds of genesthat code for the cellular machinerynecessary for growth, movement andreproduction. For all of these genes tohave evolved simultaneously by randomrepresents an incredible if notmiraculous event in the history of thisplanet. For them to have becomeorganised into a functioning genome byrandom, while the machinery required

to read and translate the geneticchemical code into life originatedindependently and about the same timeagain by random and all within a cellularstructure where the optimaltemperature, salinity and acidity werepresent by random, represents anincredible sequence of events thatatheists and evolutionists are simplyunable to provide a credible explanationfor. In reality, the discoveries ofpioneering science should only increasethe believers' conviction in the creativepower of Allah (SWT) while provokingthought in the minds of atheists andagnostics as to how extraordinarilycomplex and organised living systemsare.

The ethical debate surrounding thedevelopments from Venter's team willcontinue and Muslims should provide anIslamic perspective upon this issue. Byuncovering the mechanisms by whichgenomes control cells, like the softwareof a computer, the work of Venter's teamopens the door to understanding therole of individual genes in the processesof cellular life which may help us tobetter understand diseases such ascancer as well as those due to bacterialinfections, thereby opening the door tothe development of new medicines andpossibly cures. Islam has sanctifiedhuman life and encourages medicaltreatment. This is based upon severalevidences including the hadith reportedby Imam Ahmed from Anas (ra) who saidthat the Messenger of Allah (SWT) said: "Allah has created the illness and thecure. So seek the cure."

Therefore, experiments such thosepublished by Venter's team last weekshould not be prohibited butencouraged. However, such work shouldnot be the basis for humanity to try andraise herself to the status of Allah (SWT)failing to acknowledge His (SWT)mastery and knowledge in the creationof the simplest forms of life.�



“We are an old nation united around acertain idea of human dignity, and inparticular of a woman's dignity, arounda certain idea of how to live together. Thefull veil that hides the face completely isan attack on those values.... Citizenshiphas to be lived with an uncovered face.”[President Sarkozy]

France has often witnessed turbulentencounters with its Muslim population –the largest in Europe. It is said acrossEurope that Muslims don’t integrate orassimilate well within secular society andconsequently are a threat to liberal values.Secularism sidelines religion to theconfines of the personal and the individual.Yet the Muslim woman’s dress is seen asanything other than this. The burqa, hijaband niqab are said to threaten the essenceof liberal values. And perverse twist to it allis that the well-known womaniser Sarkozyhas become a spokesperson for woman’sdress and dignity.

The French Government, notorious for itsextremist secular outlook, have addedniqab to the already banned hijab assomething they view as an ‘insult’ to

secular values. On the 19th of May, theFrench cabinet approved a bill to ban theniqab in public life. The approval of thisbill by parliament will result in thecreation of a new offence of “incitement tocover the face for reasons of gender”.Those who are caught committing this‘offence’ would be liable to a fine of €150or be forced to take lessons on the valuesof French citizenship.

Anti-Muslim fervour from the Frenchgovernment has resulted in an increasednumber of attacks on Muslims, desecrationof Muslim graves; women’s face veils havebeen pulled off, and mosques and shopsowned by Muslims been vandalised –illustrating the complete lack of tolerancein accepting difference.

Face veil: Why the controversy?Debates concerning the face veil amongstMuslims have been centred aroundwhether it is an obligation,recommendation or a matter of choice(mubah) from Allah (swt). What is agreedupon is that the complete hijab (whichincludes the face veil) were obligatoryrequirements for the wives of the Prophet

(saw), with a majority regarding the faceveil as a matter of choice (mubah).

Therefore, if the face veil is a non-issueamongst Muslims, why has it become atopic of much scrutiny and law making inFrance?

John R. Bowen, author of “Why the Frenchdon’t like Headscarves: Islam, the State andPublic Space”, comments regarding theMuslim woman’s dress, “There is a sensethat people who are publicly displayingtheir religious or ethnic characteristicsare a slap in the face of French appliedpolitical theory.”

The presence of the hijab, burqa or theniqab in public life is therefore acontinuous reminder of the rejection ofliberal values by Muslim women and theirstrong acceptance and adherence to Islam.The West term this strong attachment toIslamic beliefs and values ‘Islamism’.Honest debate has been replaced bydraconian policing of Muslims in adesperate attempt to quash any semblanceof Islam in the public domain – minaret,hijab and niqab alike. Furthermore, thepolicy of assimilating Muslims into Frenchsociety calls for a reshaping of Muslimidentity to a French identity.

French identity and citizenship – the roadto assimilationFrench nationality law has been based onthe principles of ‘Jus Soli’ (right ofnationality by birth) and ‘Jus Sanguinis’(right of nationality by blood). However inrecent times, more has been expectedfrom Muslim nationals from France whichsubscribe to the agenda of assimilation.Citizenship is not simply about holding apassport and having citizens rightsprotected by French law, it is aboutacceptance of secular liberal values and a

The Attack on the Face Veil:Veiling Political Motives

Ruksana Rahman

rejection of anything that may contradict it. Article 1 of the French constitution states:"France shall be an indivisible, secular,democratic and social Republic. It shallensure the equality of all citizens beforethe law, without distinction of origin,race or religion.”

The French assimilationist agenda linkscitizenship with the sharing of a set ofliberal values. For Muslims in France, thisincludes the severing of ties between theirMuslim brothers and sisters around theworld based on French interests and therejection of Islamic Shariah rules thatupset liberal society.

Identity and citizenship – is there adifference?Defining identity has been a complexdiscussion in Western societies. Oneinterpretation of identity is associated withmulticulturalism where difference iscelebrated. The poet Benjamin Zephaniah(who declined acceptance of the OBE)describes this in ‘The British’: “Sprinkle some fresh Indians, Malaysians,Bosnians, Iraqis and Bangladeshistogether with some Afghans, Spanish,Turkish, Kurdish, JapaneseAnd Palestinians. Then add to the meltingpot. Leave the ingredients to simmer. As they mix and blend allow theirlanguages to flourishBinding them together with English.”

He views Britishness as a mix of cultures,in contrast to the right wing BNP who callfor repatriation of immigrants and regardBritishness as a matter of race – whilstothers subscribe to Britishness as a set ofvalues that all citizens must give allegianceand commitment to.

For Muslims living in the West, such adebate can easily be concluding byreference to Islam. Allah (swt) reminds thebeliever that what defines a Muslim is theirbelief: “Say, O you that reject faith! Iworship not that which you worship, norwill you worship that which I worship.And I will not worship that which youworship, nor will you worship that whichI worship. To you your way and to memine” [TMQ Al-Kafiroun: 1-6]

Therefore, what fundamentally definesidentity are the beliefs and values oneholds that define the way by which

Muslims conduct their affairs. Citizenship and identity are therefore twounique principles that are unrelated.Therefore, it is not a contradiction to havea British passport and live by Islamicvalues. Being a ‘law abiding citizen’ is not atthe expense of disobedience to Allah (swt).

The European Muslim Identity – Dangersand consequences

Tariq Ramadan in the book ‘To be aEuropean Muslim’ argues that: “Muslim identity is not closed, confinedwithin rigid and fixed principles”. Heargues that Muslims in Europe can bebound by two identities. The Muslimidentity is described as the identity thatanswers the ‘Why’- in other words thefundamental beliefs and theEuropean/national identity answers the‘How’ – in other words how a citizenshould live with society. Such a dichotomytherefore propagates a very secularinterpretation of identity. According toRamadan, the European Muslim is one thatseparates the spiritual from the temporal;one that carries the belief of Islam, but failsto act upon it in all aspects of life. Such aviewpoint promotes the idea ofcompromise without distinguishingbetween citizenship and identity.

Some advocates of such an interpretationof identity have also gone as far as defininga new type of fiqh for minority Muslims inEurope, which can even go as far as torecommend women discarding hijab orjilbab!

Muslims faced with a barrage of attacks ontheir way of life, must therefore be awareof the dangers of justifying compromise ofIslamic principles through the use ofquestionable fatawa – the start of aslippery sloping path away fromsteadfastness and adherence to Islam. TheProphet (saw) once said that at one time“holding onto Islam will be like holdingonto a burnt ember”.

The Khilafah: Identity and Citizenship Islam makes a distinction between identityand citizenship. Citizenship is a contractentered into between the resident of theKhilafah and the Khalifah. Citizenship isnot determined by ethnicity, gender,religion or the majority. Rather eachindividual resident whether Muslim or non-Muslim has the right of protection and

justice according to Islam. In return theState’s expectations of its citizens isadherence to the Shariah law - which non-Muslims would regard as the “law of theland” and are required like everyone torespect even if they don’t believe in itsdivine origin.

Muslims who reside outside the domainsof the Islamic state are not citizens of theKhilafah. This means the Khalifah is notduty bound to protect or provide justice tothose who reside outside the Khilafah. So,what binds Muslims who reside outsidethe Khilafah with the Islamic state?

Allah (swt) describes the Muslim Ummahas; “...the best nation brought forth tomankind, you enjoin the good, forbid theevil and believe in Allah” [TMQ Al-Imran3:110]

Thus the Muslim identity binds Muslimstogether regardless of geographicalboundaries. Ultimately, that involvessharing the Islamic beliefs and values. Thisunique bond enables believers to feel thepain and suffering of other believers thatsurpass geographical boundaries.

ConclusionThe discussions surrounding the banningof the face veil are politically motivated, toadd further fuel to the fire. Muslims mustnot be drawn into a debate on whetherthe face veil is an obligation or not. Ratherthe political agenda of assimilation must beexposed. Muslims in the West must also beclear on the difference between holding apassport and adopting secular values.Misunderstanding and tensions betweenMuslims and non-Muslims can only bequashed through educating the peopleabout Islamic values/beliefs through livingIslam in our daily lives. This cannot beachieved by being silent on controversialissues. Disagreement and debate can behealthy and effective in shifting publicperceptions.

Moreover, trials and tribulations are anatural consequence of Allah (swt) testingthe believers. As Allah (swt) reminds us:“Never will the Jews and Christians behappy with you until you follow theirway (Millatahum)” [TMQ 2:120]�


Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, Suite 301, 28 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3SSTel: 07074 192 400 - www.hizb.org.uk - [email protected]

israeli terror on the seas - wordpress.com...newsbites 2 :: khilafah magazine:: june 2010 violence...

Documents