American Iranian Tensions: Brinkmanship or War?

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

American Iranian Tensions: Brinkmanship or War?

Recent tensions between Western powers and Iran have again embroiled the region in a diplomatic frenzy, as nations scramble to shield themselves from the fallout of America's renewed confrontation with Iran over its nuclear programme. Iranian military exercises laced with fiery rhetoric emanating from Tehran, and the presence of Western warships to enforce sanctions in the Persian Gulf has caused international panic.

Against the backdrop of Iranian threats to close the Straits of Hormuz, oil prices have spiked and speculation is forever mounting about Israeli and American military strikes against Iran. For instance, the US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta hinted at military action in the event Iran went too far. He said, "We have to make sure we are ready for any situation and have all options on the table. We must keep all capabilities ready in the event those lines are crossed." (Tensions high, US warns Iran not to block shipping, AP Online, January 13 2012). The latest bout of verbal dueling occasionally punctuated with threats of military action has sounded alarms bells as far away as Moscow and Beijing. Speaking at a news conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned about attacking Iran. He said, "I have no doubt that it would pour fuel on a fire which is already smoldering, the hidden smoldering fire of Sunni-Shia confrontation, and beyond that (cause) a chain reaction - I don't know where it would stop...On the chances of whether this catastrophe will happen or not you should ask those who repeatedly talk about this." (Western strike on Iran would be "catastrophe": Russia, Reuters Online, January 18 2012). Li Song, Deputy Director-General of the Department of Arms Control of the Chinese Foreign Ministry said, "Military action would have a disastrous effect on the peace and stability of the Middle East. Once a war takes place in the region, not only will countries in the region be affected and impacted, world energy security and the world economy will suffer a deadly blow." (Iran attack would be 'disastrous', China Daily Online, January 19 2012).

However, beyond the current military buildup, there are gestures from both sides that are seemingly at odds with the warmongers in Washington and Tehran. The American rescue of hijacked Iranian fishermen and Obama's letters to the Iranian leadership suggests that America wants to resolve the issue diplomatically. Commenting on the letter, Ebrahimi, who is the Deputy Chairman of the Majlis's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee said, "In the letter, Obama has mentioned cooperation and negotiation based on the interests of the two countries. He has stated in the letter that they will not take any hostile action against the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is not the first time that Obama has sent a message and letter to the Islamic Republic of Iran. He has repeatedly spoken in a soft tone about the Islamic Republic of Iran, but, in practice, he has not acted accordingly." (Details of Obama's letter to Iran released, Tehran Times Online, Jan 18 2012)The Iranians have also reciprocated with warm overtures of their own and have stated that the US has a right to move its warships in the Persian Gulf. All of this begs the question: Is this a serious crisis that will lead to war or is the crisis manufactured to support ulterior motives?

One cannot help but notice that over the past six years or so America has had ample opportunities to attack Iran's nuclear sites or initiate regime change, but on each occasion America either downplayed the Iranian threat or gave half-hearted support to the Iranian people to topple the regime. Some of these incidents can be summarized as:

1. In 2005, the Bush administration dismissed Israeli fears of a nuclear armed Iran after the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) revised its estimate from 2010 to 2015, the date by when Iran would possess an atomic bomb. Additionally, and more significantly, the NIE claimed that Iran had abandoned plans to weaponize its nuclear program in 2003.

2. In 2007, America's ambivalence toward Iran was again on display when another close ally, Britain, found its naval personnel captives of Iranian forces. American indifference was deliberate, as Washington feared that Britain had engineered the naval fiasco to instigate an attack on Iran.

3. In 2008, America also refused to sell Israel advanced versions of its bunker-buster bombs and dismissed Israel's show of air power over the Mediterranean, which was widely interpreted by many observers as a dry run to attack Iran

4. In 2009, protests in Iran erupted against Ahmadinejad's re-election. The protestors were strongly supported by the European Union, but America's support was cagy at best. America's patchy support was out of step with European support for the Iranian people and underscored America's reluctance to take decisive action against the Iranian regime.

But one may argue that all of this was in the past, and that the US has finally come round to attacking Iran and thereby addressing Israeli concerns. Supporters of this view bring several evidences to justify their stance. For instance they point to the advance weaponry that is being deployed in Israel as well as the GCC countries, and covert actions to sabotage Iran's nuclear programme. For instance the Wall Street Journal revealed that the White House will provide the United Arab Emirates (UAE) with "thousands of advanced ‘bunker-buster' bombs and other munitions, part of a stepped-up U.S. effort to build a regional coalition to counter Iran. Another source mentioned 500 Hellfire air-to-surface missiles in addition to the other munitions. The Wall Street Journal report added: "The Obama administration is trying to build up the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which comprises Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, U.A.E. and Kuwait, as a unified counterweight to Iran. The newspaper reminded its readers of a $67 billion arms deal initiated by the White House with Saudi Arabia in 2010 to supply the second nation with 84 F-15 fighter jets and 2,000-pound bunker-busting bombs, 72 Black Hawk and 70 Apache Longbow attack helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-2 and other missiles, and warships. The Wall Street Journal also reported that the U.S. Defence Department plans to supply Stinger missiles and medium-range air-to-air missiles to Oman. (US Plans Bomb Sales in Gulf to Counter Iran, Wall Street Journal, November 11, 2011). The news media is rife of reports regarding Israeli covert actions that include a campaign of assassinations, bombings, cyber attacks and defections to weaken the Iranian regime and to halt the country's attempts to develop nuclear capabilities.

However, by deploying advanced weaponry in Israel, arming GCC countries and conducting clandestine activities against in Iran does not mean that the intended US target is Iran. The US can easily point the weaponry elsewhere.

Furthermore, the most important question which observers forget to ask is why the US would risk further instability in the region and attack Iran.

It should be noted that Iran has played a pivotal role to help entrench US hegemony in the region. These are:

1. Iran has provided stability in Iraq through the governing Shia leadership much of it was developed and nurtured under Tehran's tutelage.

2. Tehran has also provided invaluable support to American forces to contain the Afghan Pushtun resistance from spreading westwards.

3. Iran continues to buttress Assad's regime in Syria by providing military support as well as soliciting support from movements and countries across the region.

4. America has adroitly exploited the Iranian threat to bolster its military agreements with Israel and GCC countries. Hence, Iran is a pillar of US stability in Middle East, and the US has often regarded Iran as the leader of the Shia crescent stretching from Lebanon to Yemen, and act as her watchman over the Middle East's hydro-carbon reserves.

5. America has exploited Iran's nuclear programme to justify its missile shield for allies in Europe, the Middle East and parts of Asia.

So by attacking Iran the US will only undermine her interests in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East. Simply put, America has too much to lose. Additionally, the high price of oil that would naturally ensue from such a conflict would exacerbate the US economy and hamper the miniscule growth that the US is currently experiencing. Obama cannot afford to go war, as his re-election depends on the US economy generating more jobs for the unemployed.

The reason behind the imposition of sanctions and clandestine operations in Iran is to assuage Israeli security concerns, and secure much needed Jewish votes for the Obama administration ahead of the US general elections in November 2012. America is fully aware that this is the maximum pressure it can apply on Iran without toppling the Iranian regime and impacting America's regional hegemony.

As for the Jewish state, it still harbours ambitions to hoodwink America into a military confrontation with Iran. Israel's defence minister Ehud Barak is said to have told General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, that Israel will give the US no more than 12 hours notice before it ventures to demolish Iran's nuclear installations. As a result the US postponed its military exercise with Israel (US miffed as Israel hints at unilateral strike on Iran N-sites, Times of India, January 23 2012). America is treading carefully with Israel, and trying to ensure that it does not launch any military strikes. The Europeans on the other hand are keen to support Israel covertly, hoping that any confrontation with Iran would drag America into another war that it cannot afford and would eventually bleed America to death. Nonetheless, the European effort is timid, as Europe is consumed with the economic crisis. All of this means that unless Israel gets support from Europe in particularly the GCC countries that are loyal to Britain, the chance of a military strike is of diminutive proportions.

This then leaves the unanswered question of the timing of the tensions coupled with the rapid buildup of arms. The tensions between Iran and America were accentuated in response to the IAEA report, and serve two objectives. First, America sought to address Israeli concerns by demonstrating its seriousness to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions by enforcing sanctions and talking tough. Second, America is preparing to intervene in Syria and the buildup of weapons is in part to address this eventuality. The timing of the intervention will depend on how quickly the US can get the Syrian opposition united to take over from Assad's regime. Russia is acutely aware of American intentions to invade Syria and has warned America that it would not support a UN resolution authorizing force.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "If some intend to use force at all cost ... we can hardly prevent that from happening. But let them do it at their own initiative on their own conscience, they won't get any authorization from the U.N. Security Council." (Russia warns against military action against Syria, rejects criticism of munitions delivery, Washington Post Online, January 18 2012). To dissuade the US, Russia has sent shipment of weapons to Syria, signed a military jet deal worth $550 million and stationed some of naval ships in Syria.

The other reason for flooding the region with arms is that America is preparing for an eventual war with major powers such as Russia, China and Europe over the control of the oil and gas supplies of the Middle East. She is also preparing for the return of the Caliphate and will use her agents to delay the unification of Muslim countries in the region.

                                 

Abu Hashim al-Punjabi

01 Rabi' I 1433
23/01/12

Source

Speech of Sheikh Ahmad al-Qasas on the occasion of the UN's ESCWA Conference

This is the text of a press conference given by Ahmad Al Qassas, the head of the Media Office of Hizb ut-Tahrir-Lebanon, on the occasion of the Conference of ESCWA [United Nations Regional Economic and Social Development Commission in Western Asia] in Beirut, which was inaugurated by the Secretary-General of the United Nations under the title of "Reform and Transitions to Democracy".

وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يُعْجِبُكَ قَوْلُهُ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَيُشْهِدُ اللَّهَ عَلَى مَا فِي قَلْبِهِ وَهُوَ أَلَدُّ الْخِصَامِ * وَإِذَا تَوَلَّى سَعَى فِي الْأَرْضِ لِيُفْسِدَ فِيهَا وَيُهْلِكَ الْحَرْثَ وَالنَّسْلَ وَاللَّهُ لَا  يُحِبُّ الْفَسَادَ

(And of mankind there is he whose conversation on the life of this world pleases you (Muhammad), and he calls Allah to witness as to that which is in his heart; yet he is the most rigid of opponents. And when he turns away (from you) his effort is to make mischief in the land and to destroy the crops and the cattle; and Allah loves not mischief)  [Surah al Baqarah 2:204-2:205]

The Secretary General of the United Nations and those in attendance:

Now is the time to end your ‘guardianship' over the people, for it is the time of an Ummah that has begun to liberate itself from the control of the West, so as to regain her authority and restore the rule of Islam in her life.

The United Nations, represented by its Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, entertained us by holding a conference addressing the uprising that marked the last year in this region of the Islamic world; and which has continued into this year.

This uprising aims to topple the regimes and commence a period that, by the Will of Allah, will radically change the face of the region.

The envoy of the Western countries, Ban Ki-Moon, has come as if to say to the people of the region: ‘Do not think that by your uprising you will break the shackles of all forms of Western cultural, political, economic and military domination. We will, rather, remain custodians over you and over your protest movement, so that there will be a change from the era of secular tyrants to an era of secular Democrats; without a change in the identity of the State, or the constitutions derived from Western civilization, nor in foreign policy, economic policy, educational curricula; and not in the treacherous treaties agreed to by your despotic rulers - especially those made with the Jewish entity. We will continue teaching you the way you should live, and the way you should practice politics, government, economics, media, security and education...'

Thus, Professor Ban came to continue attempts to contain the revolution; attempts that U.S. and Europe started since the start of the revolution in Tunisia in order to abort it, control its direction and harvest its fruits before the Ummah is able reap such fruits. So often, Western States - led by the United States - have used the international organisation as a tool for achieving their goals and to serve their interests in the world. There is no surprise in that, for they established the organisation after World War II to consolidate their hegemony over the world!

Our Ummah cannot forget the belligerent resolutions of the United Nations against it since the early days of its establishment until today; particularly, the resolution of dividing Palestine between its people and those alien Jews who were expelled from other parts of the world.

This was followed by the resolution to invade Afghanistan and give legitimacy to the American occupation of Iraq, which resulted in massacres and tragedies against our Ummah.

This is besides ignoring the repeated attacks of the Jewish entity against the people of Palestine and the neighbouring countries.

Add to this the policies of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank that has led to the impoverishment of the people of the region, controlling their economic decisions and looting their wealth.
We are not naïve to be deceived by the lie of the alleged neutrality of the international organization.
Rather, we say it clearly: The organisation which you represent, Mr. Secretary-General, is one of the bitterest opponents of the Islamic Ummah.

You acknowledged the crime that your international organisation has committed for so long against the people of the region.

You admitted the organisation was "too close to the governments but not close enough to the community" and you declared repentance, saying: "As I begin my second term as Secretary-General, I want to emphasize that the United Nations will be at your side, we are firmly committed to help the Arab countries during this transitional phase" and you said that "reform must be real, because in most cases the changes are cosmetic i.e. without transfer of real power to the people".

Is this your penitence real - or is it just a new deception and a repeated illusion?!

The answer is taken from your own words, by which you condemned yourself again.

So, I will condemn you using your own words.

You announced that your negotiator was at the heart of the talks in Yemen - talks that were used to abort the revolution of the people of Yemen, and resulted in consolidating the authority of the gang of the tyrant and butcher, Ali Saleh, so protecting him from accountability and trial.

You even called, in your talk, for the tyrant of Yemen "to adhere to the terms of the agreement"! Thus, you contradicted yourself and proved immediately that your organization continues its hypocrisy.

Professor Ban did not forget to give us lessons in human rights and women's rights, according to the UN's

We say to him: Stop giving us lessons in human and women rights. For your law is not, in our view, a source for defining the human rights.

We have enough that makes us in no need of your worn out law.

Look back a little, Mr. Secretary-General, to see what the States that led this Declaration, and their civilization, have committed in terms of violations to the rights of humanity. Most recently are the ugliest pictures showing the scene of American soldiers desecrating the bodies of our dead Afghans.

Look also how your law insulted women when it ‘equalized' the sexes in rights and duties, so depriving a woman from her right of financial maintenance, as well as her children. It, instead, forced her to work, and made of her a frivolous means to market the most despicable cheap goods! There will come a day when you, Mr. Secretary-General, will learn human rights from our Great Shar'.

The ‘professor' did not forget also to show his compassion towards the unemployed youth in our country, as he believed that "the Arab countries must provide fifty million jobs over the next decade to accommodate the young people who will enter the realm of work."

Have you not heard, Mr. Ban, the news that millions came out two-months ago in demonstrations in more than a thousand of capitalist cities, before you came to preach us lessons in economy?!

Isn't it time to acknowledge that the capitalist system - which your organization has enshrined in in the world - including in our country - lies behind the misery suffered by hundreds of millions of people?!

Aren't you aware that when you lack something yourself, then you cannot give it to others?!

Dear participants at the Venice Hotel:

The revolution of the Ummah is not only a revolution against the tyrant rulers.

It is rather a revolution against everything they represent in terms of aggression on the identity of the Ummah, her civilization, culture, Shari'ah and all of her other essentials.

It is a revolution against submission to the West, its civilisation, culture and political order.

So, the alternative which the Ummah looks for is not the Western model reflected in the so-called civil democratic state produced by Western civilisation: the civilisation of separating the religion from life.

Rather, the alternative which the Ummah looks for and strives for is the State that will unify the Ummah after a long period of fragmentation; where the sovereignty in it is for the law of Allah, rather than the United Nations Charter, or man-made constitutions.

Authority in the State would be for the Ummah which chooses its ruler, without supervision of the Security Council, the White House, Paris or London; or of the ruling gangs pinned and supported by the West in our country for tens of years in opposition of her people.

As to those who participated in the conference, declaring that they represent revolutions and the rebels, we say to them:

Relying on the international powers, appeasing them and depending on their help for challenging the dictators is like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

Allah (swt) says:

{ وَلا تَرْكَنُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُ وَمَا لَكُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ مِنْ أَوْلِيَاءَ ثُمَّ لَا تُنْصَرُونَ }

(And incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will seize you; and you will have no protectors other than Allah, nor shall you be helped.)

Moreover, this is a betrayal to Allah, His Messenger and the believers, where Allah Almighty says:

وَاذْكُرُوا إِذْ أَنْتُمْ قَلِيلٌ مُسْتَضْعَفُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ تَخَافُونَ أَنْ يَتَخَطَّفَكُمُ النَّاسُ فَآَوَاكُمْ وَأَيَّدَكُمْ بِنَصْرِهِ وَرَزَقَكُمْ مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ . يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا لا تَخُونُوا اللَّهَ وَالرَّسُولَ وَتَخُونُوا أَمَانَاتِكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

(And remember the time when you were few [and] helpless on earth, fearful lest people do away with you - whereupon He sheltered you, and strengthened you with His succour, and provided for you sustenance out of the good things of life, so that you might have cause to be grateful. O Believers, do not be false to Allah and the Messenger, and do not knowingly be false to the trust that has been reposed in you.)

This approach is political suicide, for victory is from Allah, rather than from His enemies. Allah (swt) says:

{ إِنْ يَنْصُرْكُمُ اللَّهُ فَلَا غَالِبَ لَكُمْ وَإِنْ يَخْذُلْكُمْ فَمَنْ ذَا الَّذِي يَنْصُرُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِهِ وَعَلَى اللَّهِ فَلْيَتَوَكَّلِ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ }

( If Allah helps you, none can overcome you: If He forsakes you, who is there, after that can help you? In Allah, then, let believers put their trust.)

Remember that the Western political order lies behind the state of decline and deterioration experienced by the Ummah for decades.

Had the international powers left the Ummah to deal with her rulers, they would have ousted them a long time ago.

But these powers supported these dictators to keep them dependent upon the West in protecting their authority, so as to give them obedience and reverence, and give them as well the capabilities , the resources and honour of the Ummah as offerings in return of consolidating their regimes.

The good fruit of the blessed movement of the Ummah will not come about except by eliminating everything the West introduced to the Ummah alien to her identity, civilisation and culture; as well as the ideas, constitutions, legislations and curricula; besides the international institutions and centres of influence in the society; together with any political, economic, media, security and military influence; in addition to the agents present in every government, administration, security and military institutions.

So, as long as pervasive evil germs remain penetrating the body of the Ummah they will remain a threat to its health and existence. The Ummah will not be able to get rid of these plagues unless she adopts her cultural and political agenda comprehensively, represented in the plan of the guided Khilafah on the way of prophethood.

At that moment, the control of the West and its international organisation over us will be uprooted, and we would be able to carry our civilisation as a message of goodness to the world.

{ وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلا رَحْمَةً لِلْعَالَمِينَ }
(We indeed just sent you as a mercy to mankind.)

 

Source

Introduction to The Essential Elements of the Islamic Disposition (nafsiyyah)

The following is the translation of the introduction of the book 'The Essential Elements of the Islamic Disposition (Nafsiyah)' issued by Hizb ut Tahrir and published in Beirut, Lebanon in 1425 AH.

The personality (shakhsiyyah) of every human being is composed of the mentality (‘aqliyyah) and disposition (nafsiyyah). His physical characteristics and all other aspects have no bearing on his personality - these are only superficialities. It would be pointless for anyone to think that such aspects have any relevance or bearing upon the composition of the human personality.

The mentality (‘aqliyyah) is the tool used for understanding things; meaning it is the mode for passing judgement on reality according to a specific standard which man believes in and trusts. If his understanding of things in terms of passing judgement upon them is based on the Islamic ‘Aqīdah, then he has an Islamic mentality, if not he has a mentality other than the Islamic mentality.

The behavioural disposition (nafsiyyah) is the method for satisfying man’s instincts and organic needs i.e. the manner in which they are satisfied according to a standard which man believes in and trusts. When the satisfaction is based on the Islamic ‘Aqīdah then he has an Islamic disposition, if not he has a disposition other than the Islamic behavioural disposition.

If a person has one standard for the mentality and behavioural disposition, then his personality becomes distinctive and regulated. If the Islamic ‘Aqīdah was the basis of his mentality and behavioural disposition, his personality would be Islamic. If not, then his personality would be something else.

Therefore, it is not enough that only his mentality is Islamic where he is able to judge things and actions correctly according to the rules of the Sharī’ah, where he can deduce rules, know the Halāl and Harām and have maturity in thinking and awareness. So he is able to speak and in a strong and influential manner and give sound analysis of events. This on its own is not enough, for he must also have an Islamic disposition where he satisfies his instincts and organic needs on the basis of Islām. He prays, fasts, purifies himself and makes Hajj, engages in the Halāl and avoids the Harām. He endeavours to be, as Allah wants him to be, drawing closer to Him (swt) through the obligations He has imposed and is eager to do the Nawāfil (supererogatory acts of devotion) so as to draw even closer to Him (swt). He adopts true and sincere stances towards events, where he enjoins the good and forbids the evil, he loves for Allah’s sake and hates for Allah’s sake and deals with people with a good and upright character.

Similarly, it is not enough just to have an Islamic disposition, without having as well an Islamic mentality. Worshipping Allah in ignorance can cause man to deviate from the straight path. So he might fast on a day in which it is prohibited to fast, pray when it is Makrūh. He might say ‘Laa Hawla Walaa Quwwata illa billah’ when he sees someone committing a Munkar instead of accounting him and forbidding him from engaging in such an evil action. He might deal with usury but then give it in charity claiming he is drawing close to Allah while being swamped in his sins. In other words, he is doing a bad action while he thinks he is doing something good. So he would satisfy his instincts and organic needs contrary to the way Allah and His Messenger ordered.

The personality will not be complete unless the mentality is Islamic; so he will have knowledge of the rules that are binding upon him and will aim to increase his knowledge of the Sharī’ah disciplines as much as he can. At the same time he should have an Islamic behavioural disposition where he adheres to the rules of the Sharī’ah and not just knows them. He must apply these rules in all issues whether it is in respect to his Creator, himself or others, and in the manner in which Allah loves and approves.

When he is able to control his mentality and disposition according to Islām, then one can say he has an Islamic personality that drives its way amongst the throng towards the goodness fearing none but Allah.

However, this does not mean that there will not be any lapses. Such lapses will not affect the personality as long as they are the exception and not the norm. This is because man is not an angel; he makes mistakes, seeks forgiveness, repents and he also does what is correct and praises Allah for His Grace, Mercy and Guidance. The more a Muslim increases in his Islamic culture to develop his mentality, and the more he increases the performance of the recommended actions to strengthen his disposition the more he will proceed towards the sublime ascent. Not only will he become firm on this ascent but also he will continue to be elevated even higher and higher. This is when he controls his life in the proper manner and attains the Akhirah by striving for it as a believer. He will be allied to the Mihrāb (recess indicating the direction for salah) of the mosque whilst at the same time he is a hero of Jihād characterised by the best of attributes; a servant of Allah the Almighty, the Creator and Originator.

In this book we would like to present to the Muslims generally, but more specifically to the Da’wah carriers, the essential elements of the Islamic personality so that the Da’wah carrier, while he is working to establish Khilāfah, his tongue is moist with the remembrance of Allah, that his heart is filled with fear of Allah and his limbs hasten towards the good deeds. He recites the Qur’ān, acts upon it, loves Allah and His Messenger, loves for Allah’s sake and hates for Allah’s sake, hopes for the mercy of Allah and fears His punishment, he is patient, expecting the reward in the Hereafter, sincere and reliant upon Allah.

He is firm on the truth like the towering mountain, he is soft, gentle and compassionate towards the believers but firm and strong against the disbelievers, fearing none for Allah’s sake. He possesses a good character, he is sweet in speech but strong in proof, enjoins the good and forbids the evil, he lives and works in this life but his eyes always look towards the Jannah, whose width is that of the heavens and the earth prepared for the believers.

We should not miss the opportunity of reminding the Da’wah carriers, especially those who are working to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing the Righteous Khilāfah state, of the reality in which they work. They are surrounded by the clashing waves of the enemies of Allah. If they are not with Allah by day and by night, how then can they drive their way in the different walks of life? How can they reach their desired aim? How can they elevate higher and higher? How? How?

Finally, the Da’wah carriers need to reflect on two enlightening hadīths, which will light up their path so that they achieve their objectives and quicken their steps:

First:

«أول دينكم نبوة ورحمة ثم خلافة على منهاج النبوة... ثم تعود خلافة على منهاج النبوة»

“The beginning of your Dīn was Prophethood and mercy and then it was Khilāfah on the way of the Prophethood…then the Khilāfah will return on the way of the Prophethood.” This hadīth contains the good news of the return of the Khilāfah by Allah’s leave.

But it will return like the very first Khilāfah; the Khilāfah of the righteous ones, the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw). Whosoever is eager to see its return and yearns to see it then let him work for it as a believer so that he strives to become like the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw).

Second:

«إن الله سبحانه قال: من أهان لي ولياً فقد بارزني في العداوة، ابن آدم لن تدرك ما عندي إلا بأداء ما افترضته عليك، ولا يزال عبدي يتقرب إلي بالنوافل حتى أحبه، فأكون قلبه الذي يعقل به، ولسانه الذي ينطق به، وبصره الذي يبصر به، فإذا دعاني أجبته، وإذا سألني أعطيته، وإذا استنصرني نصرته، وأحب عبادة عبدي إلي النصيحة»

“Indeed, Allah (swt) said: The one who humiliates my waly (pious servant) he has displayed hostility towards me. O son of Adam! You will not obtain that which I have save by performing the duties I ordained upon you. My servant will continue to draw closer to me though the Nawāfil (supererogatory acts of worship) until I love him. I will then be the heart with which he thinks, the tongue with which he speaks, the sight by which he sees. So, when he calls me I will answer him, when he asks me for something I shall give it to him, and when he asks for my help I shall help him and the most beloved of my servants worship is the sincere advice (naseeha).” Reported by at-Tabarānī in al-Kabīr.

This hadīth clarifies the path to the victory of Allah, His support and help by drawing close to Him and seeking His Help. He is the All Strong and All-Powerful; whosoever He helps will never be humiliated and whosoever He humiliates will never be helped. He is close to His servants when his servant calls out to Him, He responds to him when he obeys Him; He is the Irresistible, above His slaves, the Most Kind and All-Acquainted with all things.

So rush oh brothers to the Good Pleasure of Allah, to His forgiveness, Paradise, victory and success in both of the abodes:

خِتَامُهُ مِسْكٌ وَفِي ذَلِكَ فَلْيَتَنَافَسِ الْمُتَنَافِسُونَ

 ‘And for this let all those strive who want to strive.’ [TMQ al-Mutaffifīn:26]

 

21 Zul Hijjah 1424AH

12/02/2004

Arabic Source

Audio: Aqeeda Part 1 & 2 by Sheikh Abu Talha Malkawi

We are planning to post a series of  audio files of excellent circles Sheikh Abu Talha delivered on the topic of the Islamic Aqeedah (belief).  These were delivered some years back but are still very relavent today.



Download file

The Islamic Khilafah - the difference between sticking to principles and compromise

The newspaper 'Al-Masriyoon' published on 29/11/2011 the statements of the general guide (leader) of the 'Muslim Brotherhood' Dr Muhammad Badee' which he made in his weekly address when he said: "That the group was close to achieving its greater objective as specified by Imaam Hasan Al-Banna the founder of the group, and that is the establishment of the just and rightly guided ruling system, its institutions and elements which would comprise a government which would be followed by the rightly guided Khilafah and leadership of the world".

These statements stirred up outrage from the secularists in Egypt (those who have been battling to preserve the secular system in Egypt since the outset of the revolution on the 25th of January 2011 and who reject in a decisive manner any talk about there being an Islamic form of governance). As a result Dr Abdur Rahman Al-Barr (a member of the leadership council of the group) reacted to address what had resulted from the statements so he went about stripping away the content of the statements made by their leader in an attempt to please and satisfy the secularists and those who are behind them in terms of the western disbelieving states who have been frightened by the rise of the Islamic movement in Egypt and what has accompanied this rise in terms of calls being raised demanding the implementation of the rule by Islam via the Khilafah.

So Dr Al-Barr said according to what was published in the newspaper: 'Freedom and Justice' on the 05/01/2012: "The General Guide did not mean the Rightly guided Khilafah according to the traditional model where there exists a Khaleefah upon the head of the state who governs Wilaayahs (provinces) and other than that" but rather he meant: "That there would exist a unity between all of the Arab and Islamic states" considering the model presented in the organisation of Islamic co-operation and a model that can be developed and built upon!"

This is almost an exact repeat of what happened recently in Tunisia when Hamaadi Al-Jabaali (the number two in the Nahdah party) on the 13/11/2011 in the town of Souso talked about the coming of the sixth Khilafah which also provoked a wide debate in the Tunisian arena which led him to revise his words by being adamant that the words had been 'taken out of context' and added a message to reassure the opposing parties saying: "That the choice of the Nahdah party in terms of the ruling system is that it has chosen the democratic republican system which obtains its legitimacy from the people". And this speedy revision by Al-Jabaali of his statements opened the door for him to then become the forthcoming Prime Minister of Tunisia. This was followed by the statements from the head of the group Al-Ghanooshi who stated that Al-Jabaali would be the Tunisian Prime minister and not the head of the Othmani Khilafah.

And in the same light Doctor Rif'at As-Sa'eed wote on the web site: 'The poeple of Qur'aan' on the 07/01/2012 an article under the title: 'About the Khilafah and its delusions' in which he attempted in a manner lacking credibility to present a 'Sharee'ah understanding that negates the opinion that Islam has made the Khilafah its obligatory ystem of ruling. He used as evidence the views of Ash-Sharastaani, Al-Jarjaani, Al-Ghazaali and Al-Aamadi who said that the Khilafah is not part of the Usool (fundamentals) of the Aqaa'id (beliefs) as an argument to say that the Khilafah is not an obligation. And the Doctor is excused in this consideration of his because he is unable to distinguish between the subjects of Aqeedah (belief) and the subject of the Sharee'ah laws. So the proof for the obligation of the Khilafah is established upon the basis of the Sharee'ah rules in which the evidences from the Kitaab, Sunnah and Ijmaa' of the Sahaabah are many in number and firmly establish it as an obligation.

Therefore the place of the ruling in regards to the Khilafah is not within the realms of the subject of the Aqeedah. And I will now report what the Doctor himself reported from Al-Jarjaani in his book: 'Sharh Al-Mawaaqif' when he stated: "The Khilafah is not part of the fundamentals of the Diyaanaat and Aqaa'id but rather it is from the branches related to the actions of the Mukallafeen". This is because the Hukm Shar'i is the address of the legislator Subhaanahu related to the actions of the Mukallaf (legislatively responsible) servants whilst the Aqeedah is the decisive belief that is based on evidence and conforms to the reality.

And in relation to this Hizb-ut-Tahrir (whose name is synonymous in the Islamic arena with the Da'wah focused on the work to establish the Khilafah) has published a number of statements and leaflets which discuss the current situation in Egypt and have distributed these on a wide and challenging manner. The most recent was that which was issued on 06/01/2012 and it carried the title: "O People of Egypt: Is it necessary to experiment for more decades with a secular democratic state with an elected peoples assembly that holds no power or influence until you realise that the only way out for you is the establishment of the rightly guided Khilafah?!" and during the distribution of this leaflet to the people a group who had connections with the security services prevented its distribution pretending and claiming that they were from the Salafiyah whereas the true righteous Salafis are those who put the election of the Khaleefah as a priority over the burial of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم due to the greatness and gravity of the obligation. As for these, well, they prevented Ustaadh Ahmad Abu Daif a member of the Hizb from completing his distribution of a leaflet that was discussing the obligation of the Khilafah! And thereafter they handed him over to the police and then he was passed on to the prosecutors office which then cleared the way for his release and returned to him his leaflets.

And as a result of this incident which the newspapers described (falsely) as a violent confrontation between the Shabaab of the Hizb and some Salafis the satelite TV channel 'Dream 2' invited Ustaadh Muhammad Abdul Qawwiy the delegated founder of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Egypt, Ustaadh Mahmoud At-Tarshooby and Ustaadh Ahmad Abu Daif (who had been involved in the incident) to attend the TV discussion show 'Al-Haqeeqah' which is presented by Ustaadh Waa'il Al-Ibraashi for a discussion which was meant to be between them alone so as to present an outline of the Hizb (its ideas and work etc...). And it seems that the subject of this episode changed overnight when the Shabaab of the Hizb were surprised by the appearance of additional previously unannounced guests who were invited in an attempt to undermine the idea of the Khilafah and provide a false image of the Hizb. They did this by inviting guests who were well known to reject the concept of Khilafah however their attempt and planning failed as the show resulted in producing a discussion within the Egyptian political arena and this was followed by a number of newspapers providing large spaces in their papers for articles containing information about Hizb-ut-Tahrir, its ideas and work.

When the TV programme introduced the show it read out a statement made by the ruling military council about Hizb-ut-Tahrir but they failed to read the response of the Hizb to this military statement which made clear that the Hizb is an international party that is working to unify the Muslim lands in the Islamic Khilafah state. However Al-Ibraashi (the host) neglected to mention this for some reason or another!

The guest Dr Abdur Raheem Ali used his turn to try and undermine the idea of Khilafah by stating that it is not Fard without presenting any Sharee'ah evidence to support his claim. Whereas the role of Dr Abdullah Bin Umar Abdur Rahman (May Allah free his father from the prisons of America, the land which leads the world in its war against the return of the Khilafah) was to focus on trying to give a false and misleading image of the Hizb by putting forward a number of fabrications and lies against the Hizb which he had extracted from a number of books which had been specifically written about the Hizb in the times of the past. The researcher carried these fabrications forward without scrutinizing their correctness and without evidence to support the claims. In particular he showed ignorance when he stated that we consider our Sheikh a Mujtahid Mutlaq whilst at the same time we say that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم was not a Mujtahid like our Sheikh. In doing so he made the issue a comparison between the capability of making Ijtihaad which is a strange and quite astonishing matter because how is it possible for him to interpret our statement: "It is not allowed in regards to the Messenger to be a Mujtahid" to mean that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم is not capable of performing Ijtihad whereas our Sheikh does have the capability?!

Dr Ibn Umar Abdur Rahman has confused the matter, whether this was out of ignorance or intentional. This is because Ijtihad allows the possibility of being wrong as well as being right and this is not permitted in relation to the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم who does not speak from his desire and does not say except what is correct. On the other hand it is permissible for our Sheikh and all Mujtahideen to perform Ijtihad and deduce rules which they believe to be correct whilst acknowledging the possibility of an error. He confused this issue making it a discussion comparing the capabilities in relation to the making Ijtihad so that the one listening would think that we have raised the level of our Sheikh higher than that of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in regards to Ijtihad! How unfortunate this understanding would be.

Despite all of this there is no doubt that the Hizb benefited a great deal from this TV programme which participated in the breaking of the general blanketing that had been imposed upon the Hizb in Egypt previously. As such the news of the arrest of the Hizb member, his referal to the prosecuters office and his release after that was all mentioned within the news series whereas the arrest of 120 from Hizb-ut-Tahrir in 2002 did not get nearly as much coverage despite its much greater significance and despite 24 of them being presented to the courts and handed down sentences ranging between one and five years.

Verily Hizb-ut-Tahrir has held on firmly to its idea which it calls for in an unrivalled manner, bearing on its path all kinds of hardship and harrasment from the security apparatus, patient and anticipating the reward not fearing the blame of the blamers for the sake of Allah. It has continued as such until its name has become tied to the Khilafah and the Khilafah has become tied to it and it will remain as such by the permission of Allah until it achieves its goals through the resumption of the Islamic way of life via the establishment of the rightly guided Khilafah which the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم gave glad tidings of its return after the oppressive and tyrannical rule. And this is at the time when we see other Islamic movements making compromises one after the other so that they can reach the seat of ruling, so we ask what compromises will they be willing to make so that they can stay in the position of ruling!?

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

قُلْ هَٰذِهِ سَبِيلِي أَدْعُو إِلَى اللَّهِ ۚ عَلَىٰ بَصِيرَةٍ أَنَا وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَنِي

"And say this is my way I call to Allah upon awareness. Me and those who follow me." [Yousef, 108]

Sharif Zayid
Head of the media office of Hizb-ut-Tahrir – Wilayah of Egypt

The above is a draft translation from Arabic.

Original article: http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/info/index.php/contents/entry_16025