Political Islam in a nutshell – Shari’a Court in Canada
ارسال به بالاترین
I wrote the following while in a successful campaign against the Sharia Law in Canada, in 2004. It still might be helpful to understand one side of the two sided terrorism in Middle east.
*******************************************************************
Abbas Goya – March 15, 2004
There are a few dimensions to “Islamic Institute of Civil Justice”, the so called Shari’a court in Ontario, Canada. Each dimension carries its own weight and significance and therefore none of them is more important than the other. I focus on one aspect of this legislation, paying a particular attention to Political Islam as it has been least introduced1 in the Western media.
Political Islam and Shari’a Court in Canada: What is Political Islam (PI)? What and where is the connection?
Political Islam refers to a political movement which includes any organized Islamic group that attempts to have a share of political power, mainly in the Middle East and North Africa. Political Islam was born, nurtured, and promoted by the then West bloc; used as a tool against the East bloc during the Cold War, i.e. by “Green Belt”2 doctrine. The PI does not refer to a particular political Islamic group although it has always been organized. The PI does not refer to a particular state although it came to power in Iran and since then has had a great influence in a number of countries’ legal bodies and/or laws. What are PI’s characteristics? Mansoor Hekmat described them as:
“organized themselves under the banner of Islam … extremely Right-wing, anti-human and violent…opposition to the freedom of women, women’s civil liberties, freedom of expression in the cultural and personal domains and the enforcement of brutal laws and traditions against people, and even killing, beheading, and genocide of people from young children to the elderly” 1
PI’s particular role in the Cold War was to minimize and/or to stop the influence of the then growing Communist movements in the Middle East. The PI achieved some victories, the most significant of which was the take over of the political power in Iran, granted that it received a great support from the West bloc to accomplish this project. The West bloc and the Political Islam have always maintained a “love and hate” relationship. For instance, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) would go into an Islamic conflict with the West shortly after the take over of the power, calling the U.S.A as the Satan state. The U.S. on the other hand, the main pave-maker for the IRI, would support Iraq in its eight years war with Iran. The other notable instances of the West -“US-led”- “fatherhood” to the PI are the promotion of Afghan Mujahedeen, Osama Bin Laden included and also Hamas3. Hamas is now the main Islamic terrorist group acting in Israel-Palestinian conflict.
Although the West considered the PI as a useless tool shortly after the collapse of the East bloc, however, it did not ignore the role of the PI in the Middle East region either. Once the more viable alternatives, e.g. the pro-west puppets, were missing, the terror used by the PI to intimidate the residents of PI’s territories, i.e. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Algeria, etc was functional and served a common interest for both sides; that is, it provided silenced cheap labor.
Meanwhile the Middle East politics suffered a number of significant unsolved, unfinished political dilemmas. These issues were in such a scale of significance that held the whole region back from being integrated into the global political economy. (This is out of the scope of this writing. However, I need to say that the political instability was the main reason to prevent the region’s integration into global economy*). The most significant political issue has always been the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Once the issue of the Kurds’ “sovereignty” is added to the picture and coupled with the IRI – a state that has a chronic “illness” to adapt to the mainstream capitalism while its continuous promotion of the global terrorism is a known fact- it maybe easier to understand the politics of the Middle East; and conclude that it was logical to believe that the region would sooner or later reach a critical momentum.
Did we ever reach that momentum? When, if so? Although there is a great secular, progressive, and modern movement finding its way to get rid of the whole misery caused by the both parties involved in the region, but the horrific, inhuman, terrorist act of September 11, 2001 affected the political picture of the region and the world temporarily. (While I am writing these very words I heard the news of another PI’s terrorist act in Madrid, Spain, on March 11, 2004 where nearly 200 people were killed).
Before I dig into PI’s role in the aftermath of 9/11 let’s have a close look at the parties of the horrific game happening right in front of our eyes, sadly on a daily basis. Who were going to be the main players in that momentum and how would the parties involved go to pursue their cause? What was/is their cause anyway? As far as the PI is concerned, its main cause has always been the integration into global capitalism and also a greater share of the global political power. The PI, as a political trend, developed to mainstream political scene for the defeated, ever-opposition capitalism in the Middle East after the Cold War. (What does it mean? The so called pro national capitalism always dreamed of an “internal” capitalist market as opposed to the “imperialist” one, or “foreign” investments and markets. During the cold war era, the dominant political trend which used to express the same cause and to represent the same social group was nationalism. Although nationalism maintains its presence in the PI but due to the reactionary trends that has become the major political tend of the post-cold-war era, the nationalism implied in the PI is clan-ism or rather tribalism.)
To just realize what it means with the “integration and the share of political power” we need to make a quick flash back and remember that the main power players of the Cold War were the two superpowers, USA and Soviet Union. No single state or a significant movement played the “power sharing game” unless sided and/or protected by one of the two superpowers. In 1989, the soviet collapsed; one superpower was gone. The other, the U.S.A, also suffered its significance and as a consequence, the U.S fell into a vacuum of political identity and has since struggled to impose its “master of the world” position. But the main point here is that once one polar, Soviet Union, was gone the other, USA, lost its ‘superpower’ identity too.
Let’s continue the main issue. The PI that had some progress in political power living in a critical, unstable geopolitical region, raised the flag for claiming more power, economically and politically. Once the old order was collapsed, the PI was not happy anymore with the puppet states. The PI understood that the world after the collapse of Berlin wall was a world of no particular “order”. If no soviet then no need for the US either. So, why not claiming the “fair” share of the wealth and power. After all, the PI and/or the states where the PI was powerful, were doing the “dirty job” terrorizing the working residents of its “territory” to provide the cheap labor and hence the “easy” wealth. The first Gulf War which as a matter of fact was supposed to give the US its new identity, e.g. “master of the world” position, theorized in “New World Order”(NWO), added yet another puzzle to the region. That is, the U.S, although claiming the victory, did not stamped its “the only superpower” image. The Iraq issue remained unsolved up until March 2003.
Shortly after the end of the Gulf War I, the PI shows off its muscle with a noisy member called Al-Quaida by a number of terrorist acts. Even though Al-Quaida has not been any significant faction of the PI, it had an impact on the politics around the globe with its atrocities on September 11, 2001. The terrorist act of 9/11 paved the road for yet another round of bloody warfare for the two parties involved, the PI and the US, in order to maintain and yet expand the geography of their terrorist field; and also to display their “love and hate” relationship.
Under the pretext of 9/11, US received the best excuse to follow up on the “master of the world” policy, trying to have an extra ordinary military show off in Iraq while the PI got the boost it needed once it was clear that the US is not looking for the elimination of the PI. The West is just seeking a new power balance with the PI within the framework of the NWO.
The US “war” in Afghanistan sure weakened the PI for a very limited time. However, the later policies of the NWO indicated that the US is still “in love” with the PI. That is, the PI should continue its function in the Middle East, e.g. Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere as a silencer of the people in the region; it should also comply with the peace agreements designed by the States for the Israel-Palestinian conflict and also the Kurdistan issue; finally the PI would be given some limited role in the western countries provided that it is going to be used to supply cheap labor within the western countries. (In a nut shell, the main targeted population for the PI in the West is the low income working class immigrants).
This latter role of the PI is supported by the means of multiculturalism theories and practices. The multiculturalism and its impact on the PI are far more subtle than the role that the PI is supposed to play in the Middle East. How is it done?
What and where is the connection?
1) “The strategists of New World Order were wise enough not to put all their eggs in one box. Political Islam is consciously divided into Islamic fundamentalists, Islamic terrorists, as opposed to moderate Islam. Smash Islamic terrorism and cozy up with moderate Islam. Islamic terrorism was used as a dangerous Satan to justify American militarism and moderate Islam was still kept as a potential force against the left movement in other parts of the world. No wonder how George Bush, Jack Straw, and Shruder began to compete with grand Ayatollahs of Islam in interpretation of Koran and Islamic teachings.
2) In the aftermath of September 11, racist groups got momentum against citizens categorized as Muslims. They failed because the people in the West rightly did not want to be labeled as the supporters of this organized racist reaction. Inversely and rightly, they defended the rights of every citizen, regardless of religion, race, color, gender and nationality.
While this attitude attracted the respect of ordinary people, the Islamic groups were ready to hypocritically take advantage of this progressive atmosphere. They used it to promote their politico-religious causes. They began to present themselves as “oppressed” representatives of oppressed minority. People in the west were for the rights of citizens to live in secure environment; Islamic groups used it to promote Islamic values to undermine the rights of the same citizens.” 4 How? The keyword is Multiculturalism. Why?
3) Because “Multi-culturalism always gives precedence to cultural and religious norms, however reactionary, over the human being and her rights. And it always sees communities as having one homogeneous belief and opinion – often times taking the most reactionary segment of that community – the imams and elders’ beliefs – as the belief and culture of the whole.
Multi-culturalism’s promotion of respect for beliefs and opinions is so strong that even when rights are violated, women mutilated and killed, girls victimised, respect for those beliefs and norms take precedence over individual and universal rights.
There is a real contradiction between cultural relativism and multi-culturalism on the one hand and individual rights on the other.” 5
Did I mention about the “love and hate” relationship between the PI and the West? Multiculturalism, although it has wider application than just serving the PI, is another example of how the establishment in the West provides the means and theory necessary to serve the PI.
The resolution
“The atrocities of political Islam are global. The stoning to death in Iran and Afghanistan, the struggle to force Hijab in public places in France, the attempt to set up Islamic courts in Canada are all various parts of the one and same phenomena: political Islam. Both the strong movement against Islamic Republic in Iran and the strong turnout in France in favor of banning Hijab in public places are indicative of the strength of secular movement against political Islam.
We must stand up, we must defend our secular values, and we must defeat” 4 the Political Islam. Also “The Canadian state is duty-bound to defend the rights of all human beings living in Canada equally often times despite differing opinions and beliefs.” 5
Who stands up against political Islam?
A. The PI is on the edge of collapse on “its stronghold, IRI, by a secular movement” B. The secular, left, and women movements in Iraq are organizing and so far has pushed the women’s rights, right up to the structure of the so called “coming regime” in Iraq. C. Despite the lack of consistent political platform and also the lack of a solid leadership, the recent, ongoing Anti-war movement which reached its peak on February 15, 2003 could mobilize somewhere between 30 to 50 million people in a mass demonstration around the world** D. Millions of people expressed their despise against the recent terrorist attacks in Spain, and millions of people in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the Middle East are actively changing the course of politics in the Middle East for a secular, modern and progressive one.
E. In Canada, there is a strong tradition of secularism which has expressed its despise towards the PI through active participation against the war in Iraq. Also the secularists have set up their campaign against the Shari’a court in form of different organizations, a notable one called: International Campaign Against Shari’a Court in Canada.
These are examples of the actual forces, actively fighting against the two polar of terrorism; e.g. the political Islam and the state terrorism of the U.S. This mass is the humanity’s hope.
Notes:
* The economical structure that PI is seeking to implement is shadowed by the political nature of this movement and therefore is a float rather than rigidly formulated – anything from the mythical national capitalism to a complete acceptance of the multinational capitalist rules-
The economical practices of the IRI probably give us the best picture as to where this barbaric movement is heading when it comes to economy. Although the IRI in constant economical crisis due to its political character, it has really tried hard to integrate itself into the global capitalist economy through its “pragmatic” economical efforts such as currency devaluations, some investments in some aspects of the infrastructure of the country, etc. It however always ends up going nowhere due to its fundamental Islamic character; that is, no matter how “reformist” they try to be the Islamic character of the regime displays itself in anti-human laws and policies, the distributed power among its countless institutions and mullas, the gender-apartheid and hence keeping the women as households, etc. This character, or rather identity of the IRI has always pushed it back to square on: economical, political, and cultural crisis; and therefore the constant poverty and misery for the majority of people.
** PI’s body, e.g. the common people having delusion about PI, was a faction of the anti war movement. However, the movement in whole explicitly displayed its humanitarian, left, modern, progressive character. It pushed PI’s body to a level where they followed the movement’s principal. The PI was weakened by the movement particularly during the movement’s peak. Furthermore, the anti-war movement did not give any room for inhuman, terrorist act. There was not a single terrorist act aiming the people while the movement was actively on the streets, up until the mid April 2003. None of the big, “long lasting” “war on terror”, that is, the U.S terrorism against PI’s terrorism had such an impact on the PI. (As a matter of fact, US “war on terrorism” has contributed to PI’s terrorism. Again, terrorism feeds terrorism.)
Internet Sources:
1 The thesis of Political Islam was first introduced by Mansoor Hekmat, 13 June 1999, “Iran will be the Scene
of a Mass Anti-Islamic Offensive”. ”we have seen another phenomenon in the last 20-25 years, which is the emergence and considerable development of political movements that have organised themselves under the banner of Islam. There are a series of extremely Right-wing, anti-human and violent movements in North Africa, the Middle East and today, in all countries in which the so-called official religion is Islam or which have significant Muslim minorities. Their conduct is primarily in the form of opposition to the freedom of women, women’s civil liberties, freedom of expression in the cultural and personal domains and the enforcement of brutal laws and traditions against people, and even killing, beheading, and genocide of people from young children to the elderly.”
2 Against Militarism and Islamic fundamentalism, by A. Azad (October 2001). “ During the Cold War the Western powers welcomed the formation of an Islamic front against Communism through the formation of a “Green Belt” of Islamic allies in the Middle East. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were major parts of this and they had a variety of intelligence coalitions with the U.S. In Pakistan the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) was instrumental in creating the Afghan mujahedeen. The ISI worked alongside the CIA, setting up training camps and supplying weapons to fight Russia after it invaded Afghanistan in 1979. The ISI trained 83,000 mujahedeen from 1983 to 1997. It continued its operations even after Russia left.”
3 UPI Terrorism Correspondent June 18, 2002, By Richard Sale “According to documents United Press International obtained from the Israel-based Institute for Counter Terrorism, Hamas evolved from cells of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928. Islamic movements in Israel and Palestine were “weak and dormant” until after the 1967 Six Day War in which Israel scored a stunning victory over its Arab enemies …Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One U.S. intelligence source who asked not to be named said that not only was Hamas being funded as a “counterweight” to the PLO, Israeli aid had another purpose: “To help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists.” In addition, by infiltrating Hamas, Israeli informers could only listen to debates on policy and identify Hamas members who “were dangerous hard-liners,” the official said.”
4 Islamic Courts in Canada!, (A political Challenge on a Global Scale), March 10, 2004, by Mohsen Ebrahimi
5 On the establishment of an Islamic Court in Canada, by Maryam Namazi
1
