Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit iqbal.latif's column >>

IQBAL.LATIF

Searching the purpose of our existence and where do we end up?
Articles Posted: 377  Links Seeded: 56
Member Since: 3/2007  Last Seen: 2/23/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

How valid is the Muslim Brotherhood vision of the 'Mastership of World.'

Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:10 AM EST
By iqbal.latif
Advertise | AdChoices

Muslim Brotherhood Declares 'Mastership of World' as Ultimate Goal through 'Resurrection of a caliphate.' Some think that Caliphate 'very existence would usher in a state of constant hostility. Both historically and doctrinally, the caliphate's function is to wage jihad, whenever and wherever possible, to bring the infidel world under Islamic dominion and enforce sharia. In fact, most of what is today called the "Muslim world"—from Morocco to Pakistan—was conquered, bit by bit, by a caliphate that began in Arabia in 632.'

There is no chance of Pan-Islamicism aka Caliphate  in the  world of today. The 400 years old Ottoman rule: the last great Caliphate that ruled Arab lands was built on military defeat of Arabs and Iranians; and the absolute supremacy of Turks. When  a universal Islamic Ottoman Caliphate existed under Selim the Grim, Mamluks and Saffvids lost their dynasties. Islamic world today is a result of constant elimination and eradication of their own. The Arab Islamic world opted out of free choice and through 'Jihad' against the usurpers of the Caliphate, the Turks. Power , force and conquest was an integral part of previous obligatory unity under Ottoman Caliphs. Fire power has always been the name of the game.

Sayyid Qutb, is the intellectual pillar of the Muslim Brotherhood, he was moved by an all-consuming revulsion at the 'moral corruption of Western modernity.' He is the author of the concept of 'there is no such thing as a defensive, limited war in Islam, only an offensive, total war.' 

Muslim Brotherhood Declaration of the  'Mastership of World' is similar to the wishes of militants all over who think caliphate is their goal. Very 'noble goal' indeed, but the way these proponents of caliphate are murderously handling  their differences between various strains of Islam only goes to show that future 'Caliphate' will have 1,000 different colours and can only be conceived on mass elimination of dissenting ideas.

Qutb's writings later became the theoretical basis for many radical Islamic groups of today — including al Qaeda. Qutb increasingly saw the redemption of Egypt in the application of Islamic law. Far from viewing jihad as a collective duty governed by strict rules and regulations(similar to just war theory in Christianity, international law, and classical Islamic jurisprudence, or fiqh), jihad, for Qutb, was a permanent revolution against internal and external enemies who usurped God's sovereignty. He attacked Muslim scholars and clerics with 'defeatist and apologetic mentalities' for confining jihad to 'defensive war.' There is no such thing as a defensive, limited war in Islam, only an offensive, total war.

Last time nearly universal Islamic Caliphate was established; it entirely took two wars with Mamluk and Saffvid armies to unite the Caliphate. No universal Caliphate is possible, going by what happened to the 'Ottoman Caliphate' under the name of Arab revolt. The Ottoman family, the House of Osman of Turkish origin, was not a member of the Prophet's family. They were always considered as usurpers by the Arabs. Blood is thicker than ties of Islam, 1400 years of history is living proof.

Mullah Omar likes the title of Ameer-ul-Momeneen; Hezbollah awaits an even bigger appearance that of 'Imam Ghaib.' Osama would have liked to be the first rejuvenated Caliph of Islam after the end of the Ottoman Empire, which his forefathers under the guise of 'Arab National Army' and leadership of Lawrence of Arabia, fought to destroy and obliterate.

 It was not an Arab freedom fighter like Arafat or Osama bin Laden, but Lawrence who as a great military leader and strategist got them freed from the 'yoke of Caliphate.' Demands of Caliphate are an expedient tool to find the cannon fodder of Islamic Jihad, find new ideologues who hallucinate heavenly rule on earth in anticipation of a vast Caliphate land. Islamic global unity brings out a lot of emotion and a lot of sham harmony.

It was paradoxically Lawrence of Arabia who organized the national rebellion of the Arab peoples and gave them the first opening in 400 years to become a significant Middle Eastern power. It was later overthrown by the French with considerable bloodshed. Feisal, having been robbed and deposed of his kingdom in Syria was awarded with Iraq. On his death, Sheikh Hamoudi of Aleppo exclaimed in his grief: "It is as if I had lost a son. Tell them in England what I say. Of manhood, the man; in freedom free; a mind without equal; I can see no flaw in him."

Abdulmedjit II, the last Ottoman Caliph

What grudge could 'Arab Muslim Brotherhood' possibly have with the westerners; it was not until 400 years after the Mamluks defeat at the hands of Selim I that under Lawrence of Arabia as the head of the Arab armies they captured Damascus and installed an interim Arab administration, deputizing for King Feisal. So after 400 years of Turkish rule, the Arabs were once again a power to be reckoned with in the contemporary world, though very much below the authority and strength which Lawrence had intended for them. As Lawrence himself put it, the opponents of Arab nationalism had bigger guns, and that was all. Is 'Muslim Brotherhood' going to re-install the Caliphate that his forefathers in the name of 'Arab revolt and nationalism' busted?

The creation of an Islamic caliphate, or empire, has long formed also a part of Al-Qaeda's worldview, and it is a vision that seems to have unsettled many in the west. But it will remain just a militant's dream. It is these very people who had torn the Caliphate apart when it existed. Before he went into hiding in 2001, Osama bin Laden often talked of deposing Muslim rulers, seen as indebted to Western powers, and abolishing modern state borders to unite all Muslims under a caliphate - an Islamic state where God's word was law ruled over by a caliph, or "successor" to Prophet Muhammad. 

The intellectual bedrock on which terrorism, hatred and Islamic caliphate to destroy  ‘the morally corrupt west’ is deep-seated in the spirit and mind of Islamic philosophers. The revulsion, the hatred and venom we see is cultivated over the last seven decades. It is academic redefinition of the struggle of Islam by Sayyid Qutb and Sayyid Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi that ignites fanaticism.

Muslim Brotherhood's 'Political Islam' of today interestingly finds its roots in Sayyid Qutb and Sayyid Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi; former known as the Karl Marx of the Islamic Revolution, though he acquired the core ideas from the later. Sayyid Qutb, is the intellectual pillar of the Muslim Brotherhood, he was moved by an all-consuming revulsion at the 'moral corruption of Western modernity.' He is the author of the concept of 'there is no such thing as a defensive, limited war in Islam, only an offensive, total war.'

Nothing is innovative these days in the way Hamas and Fatah are tearing each other apart like famished dogs. Political processes take a backseat as radicals are more prone to draw blood, albeit of their own – they are not used to talks or negotiations; you reap what you sow, when hatred is sown one reaps bloodthirsty tormenters expert at slitting throats. Radicals like Hamas and Al-Qaeda and now seemingly Muslim Brotherhood wish of the  'Mastership of World' as Ultimate Goal of Resurrection of a caliphate is like incessant whipping a dead horse.

Those sweeping devoted calling for the 'resurrection of a caliphate' are the supreme advocates of Islamic unity and caliphate through barrel of the gun. The unique method to reach this unison is mesmerizing. The modus operandi is straightforward: first, eliminate any divergent ideas and then impose sacred concord from top to down. Definitely unity can be achieved by force.

Qutb's stay in the United States reinforced his earlier belief that the Islamic way of life was man's only salvation from the abyss of godless capitalism. Qutb's writings in 1954-1965 would become an integral part of Islamic resurgence in the next forty years. Gerrah describes " Two central concepts, that he adapted from the Abu al-A'la al-Mawdudi, became central to Sayyid Qutb's thought and later became the "common denominator among extremist factions in the Islamic awakening movements." These were al-Jahiliyyah (paganism),and al-Hakimiyyah (God's rule on earth).

In Muslim history, Muhammad and Islam rescue Arabia from this darkness, the age of Jahiliyyah. Hence Jahiliyyah has extremely negative connotations. Sayyid Qutb adopted the term to mean secular society in general; all societies, including Muslim ones, that were not governed under Sharia law. This is how the war against secularism became a war against Jahiliyyah!In a milieu where state craft has become part and parcel of the new world, the radicals are, on the one hand, selling the dream of nirvana where 'great Islamic unity' will under a caliph achieve the dominance that Islam is missing today, on the other, to achieve that domination they have to abolish any dispute within; that is a essential impracticality.

Elimination of dissent is the primary object of Brotherhood as well as Iranian clergy; nothing can be resolved peacefully within the nations of Islam; hence bloodshed is a legitimate tool of statecraft. Assad used it mercilessly in Hama and Saddam deployed this to perfection during the Anfal campaign against the Kurds and Shiite genocide in the marshlands. Negotiations rarely work, muzzle of guns speak louder than reason, and the thirst of blood never diminishes.

Intra-Islamic divisions are now resolved by suicide bombings. Brothers eliminating brothers is the new norm. Not only is human life scorned, but holy places are a target of destruction too. Internecine wars need provocation and destruction. Sectarian and political divisions are leading to mass inter-communal terror: the way Hamas and Al-Fatah are ready for a civil war; the manner in which Hezbollah is readying for the civil war in Lebanon; the approach taken by Taliban. Nearly all of these varied groups, whilst coloring their hands with the blood of their own brethren, talk about the ultimate Caliphate where they all can live peacefully under the tabernacle of the God-entrusted Caliph.

What Universal brotherhood? Hamas and Palestinians Fatah cannot even handle a barren strip of Gaza and West Bank. For the sake of their people, why can common sense not prevail, why education and prosperity cannot become the clarion call for these demagogues? In what way is God's purpose being served when human limbs are shattered? According to Islamic tradition, a caliph had to trace his lineage to Prophet Mohammed (Umayyads and Abbasids are examples of this).

The treacherous battle of Shiite and Sunni Islam in the heartland of Iraq is another unique example of this hysterical exposition of internecine abhorrence. People of peace and advocates of inter-sectarian unity have been totally sidelined. The mass frenzy of carnage has overtaken the hotspots of the Islamic world, and no one seems to notice that this is actually the consequence of continuous chastisement of 'hatred against mankind' that is now revealing its full impact on fledgling societies. The so-called blood-infested freedom struggles have come to a full circle and are now consuming the children of Jihad; the first victim of misplaced revolutions, rather, all revolutions, has been its own children.

Such naked and barefaced vengeance has seen very few parallels in modern history. Medieval world had seen Protestants and Catholics war on the lines of Shiite and Sunni war between Iraq and Iran. But within the Middle East, where these communities are so intermingled in modern day and age, the spectre of inter-sectarian violence at this height is a new threat to regional balance and economic stability of the world as far as energy goes.

For the consumption of these bloodthirsty tyrants who want to claim universal 'Caliphate' by waging a war against their own brethren, let us take a whirlwind tour of history; let us see how bloody and forceful it was the last time when Selim I united the Caliphate of Islam. The Ottomans under Selim at the Battles of Marj Dabiq and al-Raydaniyya destroyed the Mamluk Sultanate, which led to the annexation of Syria, Palestine and Egypt. It was he who extended Ottoman power to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. The holiest sites of the Islamic world - the Great Mosque in Mecca and the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina - fell under his dominion when the Turks took Egypt and her Arabian provinces from the Mamluks. The title which 'King Fahd' took in the 80's, that of Khadim ul Haremeyn, or 'The Servant of The Two Holy Shrines,' was originally instituted by Selim I. Instead of styling 'Hakim ul Haremeyn,' or The Ruler of The Two Holy Shrines, he accepted the more pious title Khadim ul Haremeyn, or The Servant of The Two Holy Shrines.

While the Great War (1914-1918) was ongoing, the Arabs revolted under the banner of Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca. The rebellious Arabs were hopeful to establish one unified kingdom with the help of the British. Hence, the Arab Rebellion (1916-1918) served only the purposes of the British during the war. Indeed, while the Arabs revolted the British and the French signed the Sykes-Picot Treaty in 1916, thereby negating any Arab hopes of a unified kingdom in the future. But, the Arabs were unaware of this secret treaty. Yet, despite the fact the Ottoman intelligence warned the Arabs of the British and French deceit, the Arabs went on with their misguided hopes.

It was after the conquest of Egypt and the Holy Cities, Al-Mutawakkil III (1509 -17), the last Abbasid Caliph in Cairo, formally surrendered the title of Caliph and its emblems, the sword and the mantle of Muhammad to Selim. Once cementing his claim to the position of the "Guardian of the Faithful", Selim waged a war against Persia, whose ruler Shah Ismail I claimed to be Caliph as well. The triumphant crusade which followed was a victory for Selim, whose determination and bravery overcame the insubordination of the Janissaries, the household troops of the Ottoman dynasty.

After assuming the Caliphate, Selim assumed the title Malik ul-Barayn, wa KhaKhan ul-Bahrayn, was Kasir ul-Jayshayn, wa Khadim ul-Haramayn - that is, King of the Two Deserts, KhaKhan of the Two Seas, Conqueror of the Two Armies, and Servant of the Two Holy Shrines. This designation alludes to his dominions in Africa and Asia (namely, Egypt, Anatolia, and much of the Fertile Crescent), his rule over the Mediterranean and Black seas, his conquest over the Mamluk and Safavid armies, and his guardianship of the shrines of Mecca and Medina. It was Selim who expanded the 2,500,000 km of Ottoman land to 6,500,000 km. After completely filling the royal treasury, he reportedly locked it with his own seal and decreed that "he who will fill the treasury more than this, may use his seal to lock it." The treasury remained locked with Selim's seal until the collapse of the Empire 400 years later.

One predicament that is faced by the Islamic world is the factionalism, distrust and infighting amongst them; the violence within communities is extensive. In the face of huge diversity of religious and political systems in the Middle East today, no such 'messianic' figures are on the scene. Selim-kind of temporal power do not exist anymore; it is decentralizing of authority where every state within the Arab world wants respect and authority. The massive schism between Sunni and Shiite Muslims who argue bitterly over the first four caliphs (632-661 AD) to succeed the Prophet (PBUH) makes this dream of a universal caliphate even more part of a fairy tale.

Shiite Iran has its own form of Islamic government where supreme authority lies with an Islamic jurist chosen by a body of senior clerics to rule in the place of a disappeared line of descendents of the Prophet (PBUH). In Saudi Arabia, the adherents of an austere school of Sunni Islam, known as Wahhabism, give their allegiance to the Saudi family to rule as kings in return for wide latitude to enforce their version of sharia, or Islamic law. "I can see the whole Arab world falling into sectarian violence, so I can't see this caliphate happening," said London-based anthropologist Madawi Al-Rasheed, referring to Sunni-Shiite tensions in Iraq and Lebanon. "This is just part of (Al-Qaeda's) war of slogans."

Allama Iqbal knighthood and support to Ibn-e-Saud annoyed Indian Muslims since they were campaigning for the restoration of Ottoman Caliphate.

These brewing struggles are suggestive of a roadmap of insecurity, all through the crescent of volatility from Morocco to Afghanistan. The internecine wars have to be stopped. Continuous fanning of the message of 'Jihad' against the infidels have to be revisited and abolished once for all; sowing hatred breeds hatred, sowing bullets leads to a harvest of bullets. Eventually the Muslim world should wake up to realize that this 'Jihad' is being fed by the blood of its own children. Guns, dynamite, venom and poison have no boundaries. They flourish on the easiest of prey, and when these guns fail to find the 'infidels,' they can easily find unarmed civilians in their own neighbourhood with whom they don't agree ideologically and they become the new target. Governments who snub are in period of al-Jahiliyyah (paganism),and negate al-Hakimiyyah (God's rule on earth) therefore enemu of God on earth.

Hamas and Hezbollah and Alqaeda deliver messages of poison that need continuous feeding of blood to sustain their efforts. The best antidote is 'peace.' That means demise of these extremist trends; unfortunately when they are contained they start gulping their own children with identical ferociousness. It is their brand of ideology that matters and in absence of their brand being accepted, every other shade of human thinking is discarded.

Mature societies respect life and respect law. These signs of medieval immaturity need to be buried; the Middle Eastern media should join hands to denounce this vain violence all around us. It is not the enemies who are killing Muslims, once again, it is the Muslims killing each other and if unchecked it will be the biggest unfolding tragedy. There are hundreds of regions where fragile balance between communities can dribble over to bloodshed.

A lesson from history where coexistence, even in wars, was most important has to be revisited; sensibilities and rejection of hatred should take the front seat. The best caliphate would be the respect of the territorial integrity of bigger and smaller states and respect of life and property with the tolerance of opposing strains of ideas. Radicals who are destroying peace and security and demanding the promotion of universal Islamic unity amidst this carnage of bloodletting under the name of 'caliphate and Islam' is nothing but a visa for elimination and cleansing the minority thought. Governance is about inclusion not exclusion. The atrocities in the hotspots within the fringes of the Islamic world demand removal of this toxic thinking of self-righteousness associated with eliminations.

The Palestinian civil war, the Iraqi civil war, and the Afghanistan civil war, none of which are officially recognized as such, have one common element: that of suicide bombers and killers taking their own kin to graves at Godspeed. Never before in human history has the lust of destroying life of their own kin through one's own sacrifices has been recorded with this humongous intensity. This is an era which can be termed as the end of common sense within the polity of Islam.

Muslim Brotherhood instead of the 'Mastership of World' as Ultimate Goal through 'Resurrection of a caliphate'  would do well if they improve the social standing of their Egyptian populace to a height where the entire forlorn and pitiful Islamic world my go back to the drawing board and believe really that Islam the way defined by Qutb shall work! Total war has never worked before but that is  the challenge, that is the test. Only instituting  restraint, tolerance, mercy and connectivity with the whole mankind is the answer to the problems of Islam.

 

 

 

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • iqbal.latif's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Arab World, Atheism, Atheism 101, Christian Persecution, Citizens Against Apathy, ConsumerVine, Cultural Understanding, Digging for Knowledge, Ehrenfeld vs. bin Mahfouz, EthicsVine, Free Market, Free Spirits & Thinkers , Free Thinkers, FROM THE INSIGHT OUT, Global War on Terror, History Uncovered, Human Rights Vine, Ideas for World Peace, Islamic Scholars, Judeo Christians, Newsvine International, ObamaVine, Open Minded, Operation: Hearts and Minds, Political Analysis, Racism Watch, Religions of the World, Religious Right Watch, Sha'ria Watch, Singularitarians, Successful Solutions, Teachers, The Truth Network, Welcomevine, World News and Views, WTF?, You Couldn't Make it Up!
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (16)
samenslow

The idea of the Caliphate is about the same as an Englishman's idea of King Arthur's Camelot.

'Ali "Abd al-Raziq wrote al-Islam wa usul al-hukm (Islam and the Basis of Governing) argued historically against the use of sharia for governing. This book was used by King Faud to establish his credentials for governing as a traditionalist (he attacked the book). He had a semi-secret desire to be named Caliph. During the formation of the Brotherhood, the Brotherhood represented the rural conservative land owners against the effendi class of the urban centers.

Currently The Brotherhood is the largest by far of a group of political parties under the Umbrella of Freedom and Justice. Excluded from this group are the Salafi, the ultra-conservatives who want to go back to the times of the friends of the Prophet. While the Brotherhood is religious, many of its members could better be called nationalists with the Arab distrust of the West. T.E. Lawrence's description of the causes of this distrust is valuable reading for anyone really interested in this subject, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom.

Now The Brotherhood is making efforts to align themselves with the Liberal parties. The Salafi are too much even for them. They are also aware that if now they were to attempt to impose a conservative Islamic rule over Egypt, there would be a very bloody revolution. They must produce (and this is their one chance) good governance, jobs, and security for all Egyptians. If they do that, and the people are happy, they can once again think about the Caliphate.

  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:59 AM EST
ONWAPO

The Nation & Government Of [Islamic] Turkey Should Be Ashamed of Themselves!

FACTOID: In Reality (i'm not going to Use HISTORY against Turkey & Co) TURKEY 'Murder's It's Own Kind: The KURD'S! Yet They Have Nerve To Blame Israel For Killing Palestinians, aka CAANAITES?!

TURKEY (Old or the New Wannabe Ottoman-Caliphate/Sulatnic-Nation or Not) Murders It's Own People (the KURDS). They Are NOt 'Terrorists'! The U.S. State Department Need To Revise Their Over-Blown Naiveness! Soo,

Like "PALi's Who Strive For Creating Their Own Government/Nation (Even Though JORDAN is Their Secret Nation) or Will be Over-Run via Baby-Booms, in 25+ Years from Now) Then KURDISTAN should Have It's Own Sovereignty as Nation In The United Nations (i.e., be the 195th Nation, After SOUTH SUDAN (193rd, PALISTINE (194th)!

i say & believe It's High-Time That TURKEY stay The Heck out Israel/Pali Problems, and Take Care of The Turkey/Kurd Problem First!

Note: The so-called "ARAB SPRING" is beginning to look & Smell more like the "ISLAMIC SPRING!"

Prediction: Islam via the Islamic Brother-Hood thing [PROBLEM] is The BORAK OBAMA/HILLARY CLINTON thing (a Monster). Soooo, Things gonna get WORSE, nay Better For Israel! Hope i'm Wrong!

  • 1 vote
Reply#2 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:25 PM EST
agagnu

by the 2nd law of thermal dynamics, the world can be seen in terms of the necessity of unrest and poverty for the more prosperous and stable societies to come to their aid. war is necessary for the military industrial complex to thrive etc etc.

bring Muslim down and the evangelical Christians will cause havoc. America cannot afford terrorists among us, and that applies to Santorum , Rush Limbark Cheney et al. keep it save within and defend against he with out. It's better this way, keep it at arms length.

  • 2 votes
Reply#3 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:11 PM EST
Neron Kesar

If there is no need for competition, then there is no need for war.

Why compete over ideologies or resources when there is plenty for all?

  • 6 votes
Reply#4 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:37 PM EST
larrrs

I suppose that not all are willing to share their resources.

  • 8 votes
#4.1 - Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:57 PM EST
krishna-167929

Why compete over ideologies or resources when there is plenty for all?

Perhaps because some groups have a political and/or religious ideology that makes them believe in world conquest?

  • 9 votes
#4.2 - Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:03 PM EST
Neron Kesar

IQBAL.LATIF has presented many excellent points.

Early in its development, the Muslim Brotherhood had a history of advocating violence as a tool of policy. As the organization matured, it renounced this policy and adopted humanitarian outreach as the best method to promote Islam.

Islam is a peaceable religion. Extremists with their own agenda occasionally surface and attempt to misuse the power and appeal of religion.

Because the majority of true religious adherents are non-violent, they have a short-term disadvantage when compared to extremists. But as the principles and consequences of extremism play out, the people invariably turn against the extremists and their distorted version of religion. The masses look to religion as a source of morality and stability.

The masses are not concerned with fighting over fine points of ideology. They want the simply, good things of life that Americans define as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

Good governance is responsible for promoting these ideals. My notion of a benign Caliphate is consistent with this. IQBAL.LATIF expressed the same as follows:

The best caliphate would be the respect of the territorial integrity of bigger and smaller states and respect of life and property with the tolerance of opposing strains of ideas. . . . Governance is about inclusion not exclusion.

The Caliphate I envision would be roughly equivalent to a federalism of member Islamic countries who retain their sovereignty and diversity. In the U.S., this latter point is recognized under the Tenth Amendment of the federal Constitution as States Rights.

World domination is NOT part of my agenda. I believe in leading by example through propagating right principles. The appeal of American liberty has thus dominated the world without the need for territorial occupation.

IRAN

In 2008, I published the following reflections that provide some insight into my concept of a benign Caliphate.

INITIAL REMARKS ON THE CONSTITUTION OF IRAN

It is important to bear in mind two factors when reading "The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran":

1. The principles of Islam underpinning the Constitution are provisional, still unfolding, and will not solidify until they are articulated by the Twelfth Imam, the Mahdi.

2. The role of the executive Supreme Leader, while ultimate and arbitrary, is still LESS than the power that will be held by the Twelfth Imam, the Mahdi.

Iran is held in trust by its religious leadership on behalf of the Twelfth Imam, the Mahdi.

CRITIQUE OF SELECT ASPECTS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IRAN

Excerpts from "The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran":
(http://www.iranchamber.com/government/laws/constitution.php)

1. "Islamic Government is designed on a basis of 'religious guardianship'".

I advocate a marriage of religion and government.

2. The Islamic Revolution in Iran "was successful in crushing all the calculations and maneuverings of Imperialism. A new chapter opened up in its own way for popular revolutions in the world."

The Islamic Revolution is historically poised to fill the vacuum in world superpower status vacated by the USSR. I favor establishing a unified voice for Islam and a limit on the territorial bounds of Islam, as well as other faiths. This action would effectively end religious proselytizing by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

3. Iran "is planning to build its new model society on such a basis, with Islamic standards. The Mission of the Constitution is to identify itself with the basic beliefs of the movement and to bring about the conditions under which the lofty and worldwide values' of Islam will flourish."

4. "The Constitution, having regard to the Islamic contents of the Iranian Revolution, which was a movement for the victory of all the oppressed over the arrogant, provides a basis for the continuation of that revolution both inside and outside the country. It particularly tries to do this in developing international relations with other Islamic movements and peoples, so as to prepare the way towards a united single world community. . ."

A "united single world community"? A New World Order under Islam? See comments under #2.

5. "In creating the political structures and foundations for organizing society on the basis of acceptance of religion, devout men have the responsibility for government and administration of the country."

No one should be compelled to convert to a faith. However, all citizens should respect the cultural role of the faith that dominates their nation. All children should be schooled publicly to demonstrate a fact-based, non-sectarian awareness of the Sacred Texts of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Tanakh, New Testament, Koran).

6. "On the basis of continuous Guardianship and Leadership (Imamate) the Constitution provides for leadership under all conditions, (by a person) recognized by the people as lender, so that there shall be security against deviation by various organizations."

7. "In strengthening the foundations of the economy, the governing principle is the satisfaction of mankind's needs in the course of its growth and development. It is not (the pursuit) of other economic objectives (systems) , such as centralization and the accumulation of wealth and the search for profit. In materialistic schools of thought, economic activity (the economy) is its own end This at (different) stages of growth, economic activity is a factor working for destruction and corruption and decay."

This appears to be socialistic. While I favor public works and a social safety net, I prefer free enterprise and individual opportunity to accumulate wealth. The economic rights and viability of economic groups such as corporations are subject to ethical review by and the justice standards of the Mahdi, or his vicegerents in his absence. Islamic banking should adopt reasonable interest (not usury) as defined by the Mahdi, or his vicegerents in his absence.

8. "In the organization and equipping of the countries defense forces, there must be regard for faith and religion as their basis and rules. And so the Islamic Republic's army, and the corps of Revolutionary Guards must be organized in accordance with this aim. They have responsibility not only for the safeguarding of the frontiers, but also for a religious mission, which is Holy War (JIHAD) along the way of God, and the struggle to extend the supremacy of God's Law in the world."

It would be reasonable for the non-Islamic West to regard with suspicion a nation whose stated and CONSTITUTIONALLY CODIED intention is that of spreading violent revolution. Because of this intention, the West has an interest in preventing Iran from developing and/or receiving weapons that can be used for mass destruction (WMD's) against the West. The events of 9/11 have proven that WMD's are not necessary to conduct terrorist objectives. The only solution to religious-based global threats is peaceful co-existence, which in turn, is conceivable along the lines of a Christocracy of Dual Messiahs.

9. "[P]rovision must be made for the establishment of a judicial system on the basis of Islamic justice, manned by just judges, well acquainted with the exact rules of the Islamic code. Such a pattern of organization is necessary because of the delicate and subtle structure of Religion, which must be kept free from any kind of unhealthy relationship."

I have advocated a similar conception of a judiciary in "Reflections Toward the Future Form of an Iraqi Government",

http://amberneve.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/18/2014483-reflections-toward-the-future-form-of-an-iraqi-government

Judges must be capable of ruling on the constitutionality of cases in a manner characterized in the West as "judicial activism". In other words, judges must weigh the principles of law so that justice is the over-riding outcome of a legal action. Too often in the West, governments tolerate a "revolving door" between public and private sectors, laws that advantage a private interest, and reliance on non-activist judges to enforce the letter of the law at the expense of the higher principles of the republic. This is corruption at its worst.

10. "The public media (radio-television) must take their place in the process of development of the Islamic revolution, and must serve in the propagation of Islamic culture."

I favor a free, responsible press.

ADVANTAGES OF AN ISLAMIC CALIPHATE

Against the prospect of globalism, smaller states are disadvantaged. They may compensate by forming into zones.

Islamic nations are weakened by their disconnection from each another. There is greater strength in unity.

SINGLE CURRENCY

A federalized Islam would become a considerable economic power by adopting its own single currency and investing more of its resources at home than abroad. I would make Baghdad a commercial center.

Iran might be induced by the prospect of economic renewal to join an otherwise Arab federation. Perhaps Iran would forego its nuclear program for a lucrative alternative future.

ISLAMIC STANDARDS

A benign Caliphate would tax and allocate resources in order to better equalize the standard of living for everyone.

A benign Caliphate would institute mandatory public education for all boys and girls in accordance with a non-sectarian approach. The curriculum would require fact-based proficiency in the three texts of the monotheistic faiths, but it would avoid questions of conflict. Such a system would go far in ferreting out the private schools that teach extremism and a segregated view of religion and its role in the world.

SECURITY

A primary function of a legitimate government is to provide security for its citizens as well as an impartial judicial review.

HUMAN RIGHTS

A benign Caliphate would insist on equal rights for all, male and female.

  • 4 votes
#4.3 - Sat Jan 14, 2012 5:12 PM EST
larrrs

Early in its development, the Muslim Brotherhood had a history of advocating violence as a tool of policy. As the organization matured, it renounced this policy and adopted humanitarian outreach as the best method to promote Islam.

The MB lost power when their teeth were pulled for fomenting insurgency and acts of terrorism against the Egyptian government. This "moderation" was imposed on them.

Islam is a peaceable religion. Extremists with their own agenda occasionally surface and attempt to misuse the power and appeal of religion.

Because the majority of true religious adherents are non-violent, they have a short-term disadvantage when compared to extremists. But as the principles and consequences of extremism play out, the people invariably turn against the extremists and their distorted version of religion.

IMHO the key to defeating islamic terrorism are the moderate Muslims; they must stand up to the violence and take the heat. They are the key to keeping WWIII from happening. So far, the near silence is deafening.

  • 5 votes
#4.4 - Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:36 PM EST
Neron Kesar

Peaceful resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict would be one positive step toward defusing an Iranian threat to the region.

  • 1 vote
#4.5 - Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:44 PM EST
larrrs

A person has to ask themselves, would defusing the Iranian threat to the region be a positive step towards a peaceful resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?

The answer to that question answers many other questions. Face it, Arabs have been using the Palestinians to sucker-punch Israel, and that speaks volumes about the true resolution to much of the conflict in the M.E..

  • 4 votes
#4.6 - Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:24 AM EST
Neron Kesar

Settlers are ISRAELI CITIZENS in occupied territory? What are the implications of hundreds of thousands of citizens of one nation invading territory not formally their own and seizing land? Would this reasonably be grounds for war?

  • 3 votes
#4.7 - Sun Jan 15, 2012 4:55 PM EST
larrrs

Actually those settled lands are a result of a war, one started and lost by arabs.

  • 6 votes
#4.8 - Mon Jan 16, 2012 1:59 PM EST
Neron Kesar

The Palestinians are not going to pack up and leave. This is the reality that has to be the center of focus. The same for the Jews. No one is leaving, so both sides will have to compromise or continue fighting.

  • 4 votes
#4.9 - Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:17 PM EST
larrrs

That is true Neron. While that focus must remain the center of the Israeli/Palestinian question, it is also used by so many others as an excuse not to focus on their own central issues, and it muddles the entire thing.

  • 7 votes
#4.10 - Mon Jan 16, 2012 3:21 PM EST
Neron Kesar

It is not as hard as it seems. There has to be better leadership.

  • 3 votes
#4.11 - Mon Jan 16, 2012 4:16 PM EST
Reply
AlSaud

Bravo Ike, Caliphate in few thousand words cannot be better highlighted.

  • 6 votes
Reply#5 - Thu Jan 19, 2012 12:25 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
(XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
Newsvine Privacy Statement
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
FUN STUFF:
  • Leaderboard |
  • E-Mail Alerts |
  • Top of the Vine |
  • Newsvine Live |
  • Newsvine Archives |
  • The Greenhouse |
COMPANY STUFF:
  • Code of Honor |
  • Company Info |
  • Contact Us |
  • Jobs |
  • User Agreement |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • About our ads
LEGAL STUFF:
  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com