Sunday, December 31, 2006

New Arabic documentary about Uzbekistan

You can download a new short documentary about the persecution of the Muslims of Uzbekistan and their struggle for Khilafah from the following link:

The following is a link to a new arabic website dedicated to highlighting the plight of the Muslims of Uzbekistan:

Views on Saddam's death

The following are some quotations of views regarding Saddam Hussain's execution:

Muhammad Ismail Yusanto, spokesperson of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Indonesia said: "The punishment should have been given to Saddam, because Saddam killed many Iraqi people and also members of Hizb ut-Tahrir there". But he said US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair deserved no better. "All leaders in the world who did killings have to get the same punishment." [Source]

In a press release Hizb ut-Tahrir, Britain said:

Saddam Hussain may have been executed, his crimes were terrible, but the world is waiting for Bush and Blair to be brought to account for the death of over 650,000 innocent Iraqi civilians. Their illegal colonial war in Iraq has found no weapons of mass destruction, has overthrown a dictator formerly loyal to western governments, triggered sectarian conflicts formerly non-existent in Iraq, and left a trail of destruction.

Saddam Hussain was supported and armed by successive Western governments and corporations. Yet, these sponsors, instead of now being punished for their complicity in his tyranny, masquerade as 'liberators' though their actions resulted in the deaths of over 650,000 Iraqis and misery worse than under any ruthless dictator.

Dr Imran Waheed, media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, said, "In Iraq there is now a new tyranny - the tyranny of Bush and Blair whose hands are soaked with the blood of over 650,000 Iraqis. They have not faced justice and continue to support dictators, selling them arms, and sponsoring the oppression they mete out to their citizens. That indeed is an enormous crime.”

“Saddam's trial conveniently ignored his close ties with western governments and corporations throughout his years of brutality, the weapons bought from western corporations, the support given to him in the war with Iran.”

"Bush and Blair, like previous leaders of the U.S. and Britain, continue their close relationships with brutal dictators in the Muslim world when it suits their interests, and will surely discard them when it suits their interests. No amount of rhetoric about displaying superior values will hide the fact that for Capitalist states, befriending tyrants, betraying tyrants and sacrificing the lives of innocents is all fair game when it comes to controlling the world's resources."

The following is a poem about his death by Showkat Ali:

Saddam Hussein Hanged

As the ummah woke up for Eid
And the hajjis were on Mount mina
Beginning of a wonderful day
Lots to look forward to
They chose this day
To slay
Saddam Hussein

Once he could do no wrong
The man portrayed as strong
Not in the deen
But in carrying out orders for the west

When he fought Iran
To slow the Islamic revolution
The west armed him to the teeth
Chemical weapons, planes and all the tools of death
Millions of Muslims died
Nothing was achieved

Except two Muslim countries weakened

When he gassed his own people
The west looked the other way
And made more deals
To sell weapons for Muslims destruction
While the ummah continued to pray
For a saviour

First Gulf war
Invasion of Kuwait
Formerly part of Iraq
Before the division by the colonialists
Gave them an excuse to occupy Muslim land
And secure the oil supplies and strategic locations
Also sell out of date weapons to Arab leaders

Saddam’s forces routed
But Saddam strengthened
Internal opposition destroyed
Shias, Kurds and Islamists
All put to the sword
More weapons sold
To the butcher of Baghdad
Praised highly
Given everything except a medal of honour
For loyalty and sincerity to the western interests

Enter the year 2000
And opposition to Bathist rule growing
Tide in the Middle East is turning
Islamists on the march everywhere
Need for change
Caliphate is the alternative

America and the west scared
Worst nightmare
Muslim rulers no longer trusted
Need for new plan
Based on lies about weapons of mass destruction

Rule of the people
Slogan after slogan
Not working
The mother of all battles has begun
American dead daily
Wounded uncounted
25 000 plus and rising

Saddam blamed
Accused of leading insurgency
Hunt is on
Finally captured
Paraded, humiliated
So much for human rights and dignity

Put on trial
What a show!
What a farce!
Judge is a Kurd
Axe to grind
But never mind

Guilty verdict passed
Appeal lost
Nowhere to turn
Except Allah
Saddam praying
Quoting the Quran and Sunnah

Day of execution set
Clashes with Eid
But so what
Kill him before he spills the beans
Names, dates and meetings
With US and British representatives

Dead man can tell no tales
Lesson for all Muslim traitors
They use u and discard u
Even on Eid

Thursday, December 28, 2006

The importance of independent thinking & grasping the culture

The following is a transcript of a session delivered by a brother.

It is possible that sometimes there is a deficiency in some of the Da’wah carriers. This weakness is in understanding the culture and the way we study in the Halaqaat and also the general reading and discussions, this results in problems in the Da’wah.

When the general culture level of the Da’wah carriers becomes weak, it creates a number of problems and has dangerous consequences.

When the Halaqat are not given in the same level as originally intended by the pioneers of the Da’wah. And when the cultural level is weak. Each resulting Halaqah will create a new halaqah of a new generation of Da’wah carriers that are culturally weaker that its predecessor, the thoughts and culture become watered down and diluted losing the original pure taste of the concepts.

Although activity of the Da’wah is essential, it is important to understand that our Da’wah is not ‘activity-driven’ rather it should be driven by a productive and independent thinking based on a strong mentality and strong all-round culture.

Sometimes, we are extremely busy in organising activities and doing a lot of running around. So we use our time in organising events and programmes and then we often busy meeting people to invite them to the events we organise. However, sometimes whilst we are planning and organising these events, weather looking for venues or the like, we do not question the objectives of the activity that we are busy organising. So we become labourers for the Da’wah rather than carriers of the Da’wah. Where we have no time to develop our thinking and deepen our cultural level.

As a result, the activities of Da’wah would slow down after the energy our zeal depletes and we would have not achieved results in the Da’wah.

Whereas, on the opposite hand, if we build ourselves with deeper culture and strong independent thinking that we strongly believe in rather than borrowing from others, this will build the Da’wah carriers to be strong in their mentalities and result in more productive activities that a driven by concepts rather than enthusiasm and zeal.

This does not mean we incline to the other extreme where we only think and culture ourselves without any result. So on the other hand, there may be those who would be the first to criticise styles even though they could see the apparent achievement of results from them. This mentality would make the adherents of it comparable to the one who continuously ponders about battle and reads the books of war but never engages in the battle himself and is thus defeated by the enemy.

It would make us intellectuals rather than Da’wah carriers, thinkers rather than politicians, the drive for the Da’wah would slowly become eroded and the passion to rid the world of evil would weaken.

We must realise that the issue of the Da’wah is one of urgency and one that requires for us to move from sensing the problems, thinking about the best solution for it in relation to the styles and then to apply that solution. Even if that solution is not one that we can definitely say is the purest or definitely the best out of hundreds of possible styles.

However that style would be the best one we could think of and one we can see affecting the reality which we face in a positive way.

This does not mean that we leave thinking, rather it means we think in deeply about achieving the result in the best way without allowing that thought to continue for centuries before even considering action.

In order for us to explain the importance and significance of this subject, I shall start by asking you a few questions:

What is the meaning of Revival without answering intellectual elevation?

Someone may ask why are we not concentrating all of our efforts Da’wah to non-Muslims? As they may argue that RasulAllah’s (saw) method of establishing Dar al Islam in Makkan Era was by converting people to Islam?

What is the meaning of Sunnah? Does it mean we must follow the Prophet (saw) in the way we dress, the length of our beards, etc?

Sometimes we may not be able to answer questions that we have never faced before for example; we say the Quran has four possibilities of origin-Arab, Non-Arab, Mohammed (saw) or Allah (swt). What if someone came and suggested that they be lived Shaytan is another possibility and he wrote the Quran? How many of us would know how to answer that?

If any of us are hesitant in answering these questions, then this subject is absolutely vital for us to address.

In order to create a strong affect in the Da’wah that will create change in people and not to fall into weakness. It is important to understand the different types of thought and to build independent thinking at least.

The types of thinking 1. Dependent thought, 2) Independent and 3) Creative.

Three types of thinking exist amongst people: independent, creative and dependent. The Da’wah carrier must possess independent thinking at least and the leaders should have creative thinking.

Dependent thinking is when people imitate others thoughts and adopt them without questioning deeply.

Dependent thinking exists in the person of low intellect who imitates others and mimics and borrows their thought. So a dependent thinker would have no original thought but sheer dependency on the one he has adopted from.

In reality the dependent thinker adopts concepts on this basis rather than realising their truth and conformity with the reality or the shari’ah texts.

This type of thinking becomes exposed when the individual is confronted with questions or realities that necessitate a reply or the application of the concept. When questioned by others on a concept he has imitated, he often gets stuck not knowing what to say if questions are slightly deeper or unexpected. In this case the dependent thinker would be unable to answer questions related to the concept independently unless he borrowed the answers from someone else.

If faced with a reality that required the application of the concept he would be unable to apply it and would inevitably resort to seeking assistance or attempt avoiding the issue.

In this situation, the individual will adopt already-existing ideas established by others when faced with any case or issue that requires any type of original thought or research. Whether in political, legal, or any other issues, such a person will turn to others to provide him with the answers. And after taking the answer or opinion from others, he will defend and justify this opinion as if it was his own without researching the related evidences, only because of his trust in the one who established the opinion.

Can be in issues related to understanding reality and text shari’ah matters.

So for example; The role of the mind, Existence of Creator, proof of Quran or Shari’ah textual matters like method of re-restablishing Khilafah, understanding of Usul (Ijtihad and Taqleed), Qat’I and Dhan’i matters.

There are many consequences of having dependent or borrowed thinking. These could be weakness in our discussions with different sections of the Ummah – whether general people, Ulema, intellectuals, students and people from other groups. The culture that we have gone through and studied is acquired to a basic level that has no depth. This often leads to some of us to get stuck in our arguments and this slows down the Da’wah, where we may need to depend on others to discuss on our behalf.

Because of the imitation, dependency and the lack of thinking and creativity, sometimes our thinking was reduced to a personalized type of thinking that became connected with personalities and not ideas.

Unfortunately, nowadays the idea carries no value unless it is connected to a well-established or high-ranking personality such as a Scholar or Intellectual. And any existing research in this case will focus on the person and not the thought so the discussion will emphasize "Who said what" rather than "What is being said." Any person who opposes the opinions of such personalities will be attacked severely.

At the end, the individual will view the correct idea as the idea that comes from a personality that he respects, and the wrong idea is the idea that comes from a person that he does not respect. And the only way to explain the fallacy of any idea in this context will be to focus the discussion on the personalities.

Such an approach indicates the lack of thinking among Muslims. When the Muslims had a high level of understanding, they would evaluate the personalities based on the ideas they carried and not vice versa. Ali (ra) used to say, "Recognize the truth first; then, you will be able to recognize the people who adhere to the truth.”

So even amongst ourselves, we live in a society that is dominated by imitating personalities and dependent thinking, and borrowing thoughts and concepts from people.

Therefore we must be careful not fall into the trap, but break free from this in society and Da’wah. So we should not accept everything just because it was written by this Sheikh or that Sheikh, but rather we should try to question the ideas as much as possible so we truly become the master of the concept.

Therefore, the entire discussion should focus on the issues and the ideas where the evidence, and not a personality, serves as the reference. Only through independent thinking and encouraging the sound and original research can we break free of this imitation.

Independent thinking is adopting concepts on their basis rather than adopting on the basis of trust in another person culture or thought.

An Independent thinker is someone who will not adopt a thought unless he questions it and debates it, then he adopts it. Once he adopts it, he believes in his thought like he is the owner and originator of the thought. So he will be confident to discuss and carry it, debate it and be ready to apply his thoughts on multiple realities weather old or new.

An independent thinker would not get stuck often when he discusses with people in the Da’wah, whether the person who he discusses with those who will challenge his thinking, whether the person is a Sheikh, Alim, Phd, member of other group or lecturer. And if he were to get stuck or he comes across something new, the independent thinker would recognise gaps in some aspects of his culture, after discusision, questioning, reading, he would work to fill these gaps.

How does someone acquire and develop Independent thinking?

A da’wah carrier who wishes to become independent in his thinking would not be satisfied with just going to a weekly Halaqah and listening to the mushrif for a few hours without questioning him deeply in the concepts he discusses. Sometimes, we may understand what the brother explains to us at the time, but as soon as the halaqah has ended we would not be able to explain the concepts we discussed, so we have not digested the culture and not adopted it independently.

The independent thinker would not stop and be satisfied to move on to the next paragraph unless he understands the idea like his own. Questioning until all possibilities are clarified in order to make someone the owner of the thought rather borrowing the thought.

Practical steps that could be implemented amongst the brothers in order to generate Da’wah carrier with Independent thinking.

It is important that the Mushrifeen push the Dariseen in their level of thinking. The Da’wah carriers should question each other, and the mode of doing an action or accepting a thought because a senior brother says so should be dispelled. Rather, the Da’wah carriers should engage in cultural discussions among themselves and debate among each other to produce an atmosphere of culture and independent thinking whether on intellectual, political or legislative matters.

Reading and studying, discussing and self-scrutinising from sources such as the adopted books of the group you are working with is essential. However, that is not enough to develop deep culture. It is absolutely essential that the Da’wah carriers refer to other sources including the general Islamic culture, such as the books of tafseer, ulum al hadith, Usul, aqeedah etc. Also follow political matters as our Da’wah is purely political and other such fields.

Thinking about possibilities to challenge the concept which a da’wah carrier adopts to gain overall and complete strength in what he carries.

Natural discussions with people in the Da’wah, this will naturally push us to think independently, and once we discuss, if we feel our discussion is weak, we should try to go back stronger and alone to challenge, not just to take someone who we believe can be better to discuss, as long as this does not harm the Da’wah.

Question your mushrifeen as much as possible until the concept becomes absolutely crystal and your understanding has depth.

Questioning how and why is the way to attain depth

It is absolutely essential that we build our Aqliya strongly.

Aqliya is the fundamental basis were we rewire all our thoughts to, This should only be one basis and that is the basis of the Islamic Aqeedah, none of our thoughts should be rewired to a number of bases, rather a single basis only.

For example, someone who believes that Democracy should be a way forward, or believes that there should exist Nation-States, but also believes selling alcohol is Haram or praying 5 times a day is Fard. This person is rewiring his thoughts on these matters to an Islamic Basis on some matters, and to other matters a non Islamic basis. He does not possess the Islamic Aqliya, it is incorrect and contradictory to our deen.

Where as the person who watches the news and sees the occupation of Palestine, and believes the solution is not peace with Israel, but the establishment of an Islamic Khilafah and he believes that Salah if Fard like Fasting, and believe alcohol is forbidden and believe the way Men and women come together is by contract of Nikah and all of his other thoughts have a single basis and reference point, then this person has an Islamic Aqliya.

Therefore we must possess an Islamic Aqliya, thereby refering each and every single one of our thoughts to a single basis-the Islamic Aqeeda, and nothing more.

However, what we wish to address today is the aspects of the Aqliya.

The Aqliya is one basis, which is the Islamic Aqeedah, and we as Islamic personalities do use any other basis to refer our concepts back to.

However, from this Islamic ‘Aqliya, we face many realities in our Da’wah and daily lives which requires us to use different aspects of the Aqliya.

Aspects of the Aqliya – Intellectual, legislative, political and structural – need to develop on all areas to be all-round Da’wah carriers.

The intellectual aspect of the Aqliya deals with matters related to ration aspect we face in the Da’wah and our lives, like the deep thoughts of our culture, the definitions and applications of these concepts in real life. Why people think in a certain way, why people judge and hold certain ideas, why people behave in a certain manner and the like. This is a critical aspect to have in our mentality.

The political aspect of the Aqliya is used when we look at local, regional and international events and we conclude and make analysis based on these events with the knowledge and previous information we have gained from the culture to be able t deal with societal and political problems in the world and give solutions for these and mould the Ummah, so we look after their affairs. How would it be possible for the one who wishes to take care of the affairs of the Ummah to not have a Political aspect to his Islamic Aqliya?

The Legislative aspect of the mentality is knowing the Ahkam Shari’ah on most matters we deal with whether they are rituals, social, economic, political, judicial matters and to always refer to the Shari’ah texts to conclude whether the action is Fard, Mandoob, Mubah, makrooh or Haram. It also includes understanding the daleel and usuli principles related to the ahkam. It is necessary for to convey the ahkam together with the evidence especially for our adopted thoughts which are necessary to revive the Ummah. Without having a legislative aspect in our Islamic Aqliya, we would not be able to seek the pleasure of Allah without being dependent on others to give their opinions on these legislative issues.

The Structural aspect of the personality – is about Da’wah, which includes ourselves, the party or group we are with and the work with the Ummah – it defines that we wish to progress in the field of Da’wah with a clear objective with the desire to succeed for the pleasure of Allah (swt), so we may not fail, or become lazy, or incompetent or to be walking books and intellectual philosophers. This is the most important aspect from all the aspects of the Islamic mentality as without the structural aspect, there would be no goal, no objectives and no vision to create change in the Ummah. Without the structural aspect of the Islamic aqliya, we could all possess good ability to do political analysis, or know definitions of concepts and even to know all the details of Fiqh and its usul, tafseer and Ahadith, but it would lead the Da’wah carrier nowhere as he would have no vision and objective, and he would just end up becoming a good writer, thinker, philosopher or sheikh, but not a Da’wah carrier.

Therefore it is important that we as Da’wah carriers, try our best to become all-rounders and develop strong aspects to our Islamic Aqliya, become Independent thinkers and possess strong culture, this would lead us to become valuable Da’wah carriers and to achieve better results.

Abu Sa'd al-Babari & Abu Ismael

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Political Concepts Part 6 - World Main issues

The following is an extract of the draft english translation of an excellent recent book entitled 'Political Concepts' which was published in the Arab world in 2005. We will be posting more sections of the book in future.

Political actions that take place in the world are many and relate to many issues. However, it is possible to limit these in six main issues, which are: issue of Europe, issue of the Middle East, Central Asia issue, Indian subcontinent issue, Far East issue and issue of Africa.

Study was limited to these six issues for the following reasons:

Firstly: Struggle or competition takes place between the great powers in these regions; so it is naturally the issues of these regions to be the most important world issues.

Secondly: The peoples of these regions live in a state of intense unrest and attempt of liberation. Therefore, it was necessary to try controlling the situations of these peoples; particularly the majority of them are Muslims that vividly yearn to rid themselves of their rulers for establishing an Islamic state there.

Thirdly: Most of the political events that take place in the world practically occur there; so they can form a good model for understanding the other political issues.

Fourthly: These regions are rich in terms of resources and wealth. Therefore, the colonial powers and world monopolies severely compete with each other over them. They spend their utmost for controlling these regions and put their hand over their sources and wealth.

Fifthly: The other American regions were neutralized from such struggle since the time of Monroe declaration in 1983 in which America prevented the great European states from interfering in the American continent, and from threatening the vital interests of USA in that continent. Therefore, there is no struggle, in the well known sense, in this continent; for the interests of America in it are far from any real threat. As regards the relations that SU had with Cuba in the closing years of the fifties and beginning of the sixties of last century, USA turned a deaf eye about them. This is because she aimed at dragging the feet of the SU so as to expand its obligations outside its territories and Eastern Europe. This would increase its economic and military burden for protecting Cuba from the danger of USA. Increasing the burden of the SU for protecting Cuba is the reason that made USA silent over its relations with Cuba. Therefore, when the matters escalated and reached the level of a nuclear basis, USA made her utmost to remove that basis from Cuba.

In brief, the American continent is outside the well known international struggle, while all the happenings in the continent were internal unrests not far from the make of USA.

Therefore, those six issues are the major word issues. Before starting talking about them, it is good to know the great states that influence the international politics. This is because identifying any issue as a major world issue requires knowing first that this issue is a field for effective international politics. Since the important actions are those carried out be the great powers, then it is necessary to recognise the great powers in every age.

Great powers are the states that influence international politics and which undertake actions that influence other states. The great power is not that of high population or it is rich or the like. Rather it is the state that influences the international politics and other states. Thereupon, the current great and leading state, ie in the 15th Hijri century (1425), 21st century (2004) is the USA. This is because she is the state that has the greatest influence on International politics; she rather has almost unilateral control over the international situation. However, since Russia inherited the SU, which was a superpower till its collapse. Besides, England and France were great powers before World War II, and each one of them clings to remain in international politics, and each of them, unilaterally or through Europe, undertakes actions that influences international politics and America, though it is a weak influence that does not reach the level of the known competition over the post of America in international politics. Because of all of that these three states can be described as great states, by tolerating the use of the term. England undertakes political actions that give it some presence in the international politics, besides France and Russia undertake some attempts to prove their presence in international politics, as it happened in Iraq war crisis.

As for Germany, it is considered as a great power, in terms of the German people and the German history in history. However, after its defeat in World War II it fell from its position as a great state, as it happened with it when it fell down after its defeat in World War I. Therefore, because it returned little after World War I as a great state, it is possible to return again as a great state, no matter when this would happen. Its activity with France in some international issues indicates this.

As regarding China, it is difficult to consider it a great state that has the known influence on international politics, influence in the world, or many of its regions. This is despite its populations is about 1.2 billion, despite Russia takes it in its account, and despite America takes it in her accounts in international politics. However, it is not considered a great state for two reasons: firstly, it has never been a great state in the past, and nor it influenced international politics in the past. Moreover, since it became a communist state till now it did not give attention to spreading communism and nor to influencing the different regions of the world. It rather confined its interest in its region, particularly after it failed in its political attempts it undertook in Africa and some Asian states. This activity brought no fruits, and nor it could to pursue it; it rather returned back to its original domain.

As regarding India, its population has increased over 935 millions, and it possesses nuclear weapons. However, its influence in international politics is almost absent. Therefore, it is not correct to contemplate including it within great powers, because it is unlikely that it would have influence in international politics. As regarding Japan, it started to have some influence in international politics before World War I when it was a member in the axis group. However, it was temporary like Italy; thus neither it and nor Italy are considered of the great powers.

As regarding the Islamic ummah, it was a great state until the crusader wars. Then it returned back as a great power after it exterminated the crusader wars, and continued to influence the international politics till the nineteenth century. After that, its international influence declined till the state of this ummah was destroyed at the beginnings of the twentieth century, after World War I.

However, the elements of the great power are still hidden in this ummah. The signs of her vigour started moving since the concluding years of last century, and her dawn is about to rise and thus returns again as a great state, rather the leading state, by Allah’s leave.

Therefore, it is necessary to be acquainted of these peoples and states because they influence the major world issues:

Firstly: The first great powers are four: America, Britain, France and Russia.

Secondly: The peoples of the states that were great powers and ready to return as great powers are: the Islamic ummah, and Germany.

Thirdly: In addition to these peoples and states, there are the Japanese people because it is an economic power that has a great international economic influence in the major world issues, though Japan is not a great power in the well known sense.

As regarding China, though it is a great power but it is within its regional domain, ie it can be described as a regional great power. Therefore, its influence in the international issues in the different regions of the world is weak except within its regional domain. Thus, we will not talk about it in the subject of the worldly influential states and peoples; rather we will study it when we discuss the issues within the regional domain of China.

Let us start the study of these states and peoples as follows:

1. The Islamic ummah

This ummah came into existence after Allah (swt) sent His Messenger, Mohammad (saw) with Islam to deliver mankind from the darkness of jahiliyyah to the light of Islam. Then the Islamic state, the state of this ummah emerged after the emigration of the messenger of Allah (saw) to the Medina Munawwara.

The Islamic state continued after the death of Rasulullah (saw) through the time of the guided caliphs (khulafaa’ rashidun), and the khulafaa’ that followed them. It continued to make conquests and spread goodness worldwide till it was demolished in the beginnings of the last century; but its close return is expected, by Allah’s leave.

The Arabs were the first to carry the Islamic message; but Islam spread worldwide and thus many races, including Arabs and non Arabs, embraced Islam and were all melted in the crucible of Islam without difference between an Arab and a non Arab except by taqwa.

Since Arabs were the first people that carried Islam, then it is necessary to acquainting ourselves about Arabs particularly, then the Islamic ummah generally.

As regarding the Arab people, it used to live through invading each other, and it liked wars. Thus, through this what is called military natural disposition and responsibility towards others emerged in it. Therefore, it was qualified for carrying the Islamic message through its method decided by Allah, which is the da’wa and jihad, ie the material fight for spreading goodness rather than for enslaving. So, it involves in war with the peoples after informing them of Islam in a way that attracts their attention to it, for the sake of spreading the Islamic thought which they (the Arabs) carried and not for the sake of colonizing and enslaving these peoples. Therefore, it developed within it the concept of being a candle that burns to gave light (to others), and developed one of its most prominent characters, which is feeling of responsibility towards others and equating itself with others as well.

The Islamic ummah became after her embrace of Islam as one people, and developed within her the jihadi military natural disposition, where jihad is the peak of her deen. She also developed within her the concept of spreading guidance amongst men, besides helping mankind was deep rooted in them. Therefore, despite her decline and the very long time that separates her from her origins that embraced Islam and carried it through its method of da’wa and jihad, the jihadi military natural disposition, the so called responsibility towards others and spreading of guidance amongst men still exist in her as a whole. This is not much different to the situation of the Arabs who were the first to carry Islam till all the peoples of their different races that embraced Islam were melted in the pot of Islam.

2. As regarding the German people, it is a deep rooted people in terms of its existence and originality. It is an intractable, energetic, firm and brave; but it is excessively proud of itself, and extremist in its claim of the right of domination over others. Militarism and love of war are almost of its natural disposition, which is born with it. This German militarism stirred fear amongst its neighbours, particularly the great powers as Britain, France and Russia. The German people had spent many long years in internal wars and invasions, and spent many generations in wars with its neighbours, like France as an example. It lived on industry, particularly the developed war industry. Therefore, despite it is banned from possessing nuclear weapons it scared its neighbours and provokes terror in its competitors and enemies. So, the vying powers had always conspired against it so as to prevent it from acquiring the level of great powers. It is still however a vigorous people that possesses the capability of becoming again a great state, because the living being normally overcomes obstacles put in its way. When it embraced capitalism, the benefit became a part of its life like other western peoples. So Germany, which is the home land of the German people, is considered a colonial state; and it possessed colonies before World War I. It indulged in World War II with the intention of restoring its lost colonies and winning colonies from other states, besides making new colonies for it. Therefore, colonialism is the policy of Germany, rather than the policy of Hitler alone. Germany today is not far from colonialism. Though it was deprived from the wide direct colonialism, but it is one of the first states in terms of the economic colonialism. It is noticed today how it expands economically through a distinct economic hegemony, particularly in the regions of East Europe.

As regarding its ruling system, the autocratic aspect is quite clear in it despite its claim of democracy. This aspect appears in the actions of the leaders of Germany, in the past and recently.

Despite harsh conditions were imposed upon Germany after World War I, it managed to overcome such conditions and return as a great state. Two factors helped it in achieving this, which were: the first was the intellectual feeling that took over its sons, which motivated them to work for restoring its situation as a great state; and the second was the fact that England wanted to disturb the balance of power between Germany and France. So, it secretly encouraged Germany to compete with France and stand in its face. This led to the return of Germany as a great state. After World War II, there were no such factors that could help Germany to return as a great state. This is because all the allies, without any exception, imposed all the constraints that prevent Germany from returning as a great state. The most important factors that prevented its return as a great state till this moment are: the first factor was keeping its people engaged with economy instead of war industry, thus preventing it from influencing international politics. Directing their attention to the economic side diverted their feelings and activity away from the war industry, which makes states influential great states and enables them of gaining power in the productive political aspect. The second factor is the continuous awareness of the SU of the German danger against it. This alertness about this danger never escapes it a moment, and it continues to take towards Germany a harsh and merciless policy that is detached of any value. Nothing dominates this policy towards Germany except one thing, which is crushing Germany forever. Therefore, it crushes every move that Germany undertakes. This is the reason that America failed when it adopted the revival of German militarism after 1955; besides England failed to reunify Germany. France failed as well when De Gaul tried to unify Europe so as to make this unity assist Germany in rearming itself and restoring its unity. Thus, all attempts failed to prevent Europe from strongly confronting Germany.

As regarding the German unity that happened later on, it was not the result of policies, actions and political plans undertaken by the German politicians. It was rather the result of concessions that Russia offered to America when the SU collapsed. This is because the USA decided to attack the European unity by using the German unity, so as to obstruct it or delay it through creating economic problems to Federal Germany, which is the main financier to the European unity, through annexing to it East Germany, of weak economy. However, Germany managed to overcome this problem, and started looking for escaping the American pressures, and looking towards Europe, particularly France so as to involve itself in the events and influence them. It had an effective role in the EEC (European Economic Community), which became later on EU (European Union). Germany, however still endeavours to achieve that with the economic means, which means it will have an influence in European states, particularly in East Europe, through economic support. This does not mean it will have a role in international politics, because influencing international politics is built mainly on military force and political actions that lead to executing and realizing political plans. Germany still needs to do that though it started doing it through coordination with France. However, these are only attempts or actions, which are not more than reaction that increased to become effective in confronting America, as it happened in the events of the American attack against Iraq. This is besides the attempt of Germany together with France, and associating Britain later on regarding the subject of the common European defence force, separate from the NATO. This annoyed America despite it is still in the stage of formation.

All of this indicates Germany started to yearn for having a role in international politics. Therefore, no matter how long it will take, the return of Germany as a great state is expected. This is because even if the artificial forces succeeded in preventing the development of the vigorous peoples, this success will be temporary; but finally the development of the living being will overcome all the problems that obstruct its growth.

In brief, the current policy of Germany can be summarized as follows:

The German policy is built upon pragmatic European foundations. From one side it cooperates with France in forming the German French axis as the cornerstone of the unified European policy in future. From another side, it bears in mind the American interests in Europe, as well as the strategic American protection of the German security after World War II. It does not threaten the American interests; rather it always put them in the top of its priorities. Thirdly, the German policy takes into consideration the economic specificity, which is represented in its attempt of unilateral control of the economy of East Europe and unilateral use of it without associating its European allies.

It was noticed recently that the German policy started to show increasing interest in the military and political aspects that have global dimension. One of the examples for that is its increasing participation in the NATO activities in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo. This is besides the participation of its foreign minister with his two French and British opposites, as it happened with the tertiary visit of the three ministers to Iran, and putting pressure on it for accepting signature of an additional protocol that allows unplanned inspection of its nuclear installations. This also includes the active role of Germany in the successful mediation in the issue of exchanging prisoners between the Jewish entity and Hezbollah.

Thus, we notice a development in the German policy represented in departing from its previous isolationist role that made Germany confine itself to economical aspects only. Therefore, we started to notice the increasing role of the Germans, which looked equivalent to the French as well as the British role.

If Germany wished to quicken its return as a great power, then it must embark upon the war industry and make of it its vital issue. It must also be politically aware of its meetings with France and Britain. This is because it is well known that France and Britain strive to use the EU for supporting their international influence. France tries also to strengthen itself by using Germany so as to be prominent in Europe. Likewise Britain uses its political shrewdness in its meetings with France and Germany for realising its own interests. So, though Germany continues to coordinate with France particularly, and with the remaining states of the EU generally, it must think of becoming a military force with German political weight inside the EU so as not to be used for only realising the interests of others; and it must observe the international situation from a German rather than European angle, and take a lesson from the history of Europe.

3. As regarding the Japanese people, it started by living from trading and navigation and lived in a small country. One of its prominent characters is courage and handling of matters. Therefore, once the industrial revolution emerged it immediately embarked on industry; and it became one of the great powers despite the small size of its country. It did not hesitate in entering war with China to rob a part of it. It did not hesitate as well from attacking America because it viewed her danger against it. Therefore, one of the most important plans of America for controlling it was making Japanese industries not based on war, rather on the basis of trading and economic growth. She did all of that so as to prevent it from entering into the international sphere. Thus, it is now an economic force that has a great weight.

4. As regarding the American people, it is a rich people that existed in a land of big wealth. Then it entered into a bitter struggle with the European states which they occupied it, particularly England, and won its independence with force through vision and awareness. This developed within the Americans some dispositions, most of which is pragmatism, ie the concept of expediency. Due to its opposition to the European colonialism, tendency and respect to high values originated within it. However, the American people embraced capitalist ideology like other Christian world, so it started to be attracted by two factors, which are: the factor of contentment and honesty and the factor of benefit and colonialism. Britain used to use the first factor, where it has used it on its side as a force in war and economy when that factor dominated it. When World War II broke out, and the American people tasted colonialism in terms of the oil of the gulf, the second factor, which is benefit and colonialism, dominated it. Thus, it went out of its isolation for colonizing the peoples and subjugating the world to its domination and influence. It will never return back again to its isolation except with force, because capitalist ideology had dominated it and started to govern its life. Besides, benefit alone started to control its conduct, in addition to arrogance and vanity that filled its life.

America was occupied by the European states, particularly England. She was also divided into many states. So, she started first to reduce the burden of English colonialism, and then entered into many liberation wars with it that led to expelling the English from their land. Then these American states agreed to establish a federation from them, and formed one single state. After that this federal state started to annex the other states voluntarily or by force and made them states in this federal state, till she was finally formed in her current form, by including 51 states. Thus, a powerful state emerged that proceeded in the international field as a strong state. She managed to protect the two American continents from the control of the European states, and became another world, known as the new world, established from an active people and a wealthy country. USA set a ruling system, which though it is of the democratic systems, but it was laid down based on deep thought and practical understanding of the meaning of government, which is governance of humans and conducted by humans. So, she did not view the ideal ruling in a logic perception; she rather viewed it in its practical and real form. This is quite clear in the way of appointing the president, his wide functions, his role in the state, the functions of the other institutes of the state and the strong unity, which is represented in the state and forms its foundation though it is federal. This is also reflected in the wide authority given to the people for electing the president and the institutes of the state. All of this had great effect in the strength of the state and in the huge speed of the development of this strength. USA got out of her isolation at the World War II, and associated in managing the world. She even tied to run the world unilaterally; but she associated her enemy, the Soviet Russia with her in running the world since 1961 till 1979. Besides she frustrated the ambitions of other great states. When she realised that she fulfilled her objectives from the détente policy and from associating the SU with her. And that this Russian association has brought her negative results, where Europe started to escape her control and try to establish direct relations with the SU. Besides, the SU started to undertake brave attempts, though unsuccessful, to indulge in the international politics so as to impose itself as an international power independent from the policies of America. When USA noticed all of that, she decided to return to the policy of escalation with Russia and involvement in new arms race, which tells of new cold war. Thus, USA indulged in cultural, intellectual and economic war with Russia and the Eastern camp. She restricted Russia with treaties that led finally to the collapse of the SU, leaving America as the world leading state that have the greatest influence on international politics.

There are two main parties in America, which are: Democratic part and Republic party. It is hard to notice big difference between the written programs of the two parties, and nor in the followed policies. The two parties almost follow one way, without much change between the two parties in the rotation of the authority, whether in the domestic or foreign policy. Any changes in such policies are only dictated by the circumstances rather than by the difference of their programs.

Democratic Party is the deep rooted one, besides it is the party of the people, where it wins massive majority of it. Therefore, the majority of the Congress is generally on its side. As regarding the Republic Party, its emergence is more recent than the Democratic Party. It is the party of the rich and those who possess huge wealth. Most of its members belong to the owners of huge wealth and the owners of the monopolies; besides it includes a great number of the educated. It does not give much attention to win the general masses or the ordinary people to its side. It is only the system of presidential elections that helps it; otherwise it would never be able to win the presidency, because it is the party of the minority rather than the majority.

USA, like other capitalist states, is dominated by the owners of the monopolies and the businessmen, and these are the ones that have influence on its policies. However, because every individual enjoys truly the right of citizenship, and can influence the governance, whether through elections or accounting, its governance appears to be that of the entire people more than it appears in other capitalist states. Due to her massive and incessant wealth, together with the abundance of educated, intelligentsia and thinkers; besides the environment of (freedom) and atmosphere of activity dominate over her; its strength is real rather than superficial. Though she is not a deep rooted people, and it consists of individuals and groups that emigrated from different countries; however citizenship truly binds them with a strong bondage. Even the foreigner that lives there for a few years and takes the nationality and thus owns the right of citizenship, he becomes more concerned about the state, the people and its interests than his original homeland. This comes as a result of the strength the country enjoys, in terms of its individuals and the relations between the people.

As regarding her foreign policy, it is the policy of her rich and owners of the monopolies, ie it is a pure colonial policy, where there is no role in it for the high human values. Despite the naivety that sometimes looks like stupidity, which appears in her politicians, they are deep thinkers much more than many politicians in the world. They enjoy huge capability for making changes, diversifying the styles and solving the problems. It might be that the colonial zeal, besides the high culture had effect on their political activity. They view the remaining parts of the world as their own ranch; besides the states that were great in the past are not entitled to enjoy the influence they had. So, it is time for these great states to retire, relax and be content with submission to the authority of the strong, as the other states of the world do.

America owns today a huge nuclear arsenal that exceeds by many times the nuclear weapons owned by other nuclear countries altogether. The military expenditure of America compared with the other states reveals the extent of the American superiority over such states. As an example, the military expenditure of the great western states in 2002 was as follows:

Britain 35 billion dollar
France 32 billion dollar
Germany 23 billion dollar
Total 90 billion dollar

As regarding America, she has alone spent 350 billion dollar; this is in addition to the quality difference in terms of armament and that Americans come before Europe tens of years in terms of technological advancement. USA controls the UN and its organisations; besides she dominates over the greatest financial reserves in the WB and IMF, which means her domination over the wide political influence exercised by the IMF and WB over the states of the world. She also sought to strengthen her trade through the globalisation policies, which employed the WTO (World Trade Organisation) and worked for using it as one of her tools for interfering in the local markets under the pretext of unified tariffs. Thus, she worked for freeing the trade. Since she owns a huge economic power and has the greatest number of multinational companies, she benefited of the legal cover provided to her by the WTO for opening the markets that were closed before her, or those that were difficult to assimilate in the open global economy, which America runs.

These huge military, political and economic capabilities of America made her interfere in the affairs of all the current world states, and made them as if they a part of her domestic policy. She tries to exercise the policies of hegemony over all the states without exception, making no difference between the developed and non developed states. Though she sometimes fails in this hegemony policy, she does not cease from attempting that.

America has a role in all the problems of the world. She is that state that stirs tension in the burning regions. So she introduced new classifications for the states, like the term of ‘axis of evil’ and the ‘states that patron terrorism’ and the like. Even the allying states or the compliant states did not escape her harm. She rather obliged the world that it either stands on her side or on the side of terrorism. So there is no place for a state to stand neither on her side and nor on the side of terrorism.

She creates the crises, provokes the problems and creates tensions, and then she manages these crises and seeks solutions for them. She does all of that as a part of her strategy for dominating the world.

Thus, America made the worst use of her military and economic forces in her political actions, such that her influence was not limited to the economic and trading aspects, as the traditional colonialist states normally used to do. She rather extended her influence to all the aspects of civic life, so she extended her influence to education, media, society, thought, culture and security.

Her role in changing the education curriculum so as to comply with her ideological views became quite obvious. Therefore, we found Arab states like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and Egypt and others had indulged in reviewing their curriculum under the pretext of development and compliance with the age. Saudi Arabia had changed one of the most important religious subjects in its school books, which is the subject of allegiance (to whom) and dissociation (of whom), (al-walaa’ and al-baraa’). Likewise, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait and others changed subjects related to jihad against the aggressor kuffar, of Jews and Christians and others; besides other Islamic concepts, which America hates.

In media, America assigned hundreds of millions of dollars for the sake of media influence in the Arab and Muslim masses. So, it set up (Rdio Suwa) and the TV channel of (Freedom) to spread her poison in every home in the Arab countries.

In the social field, America focused on the woman so as to distance her from the Islamic values. She assigned the funds and imposed pressure on the governments to hold conferences over the subject of women. She also imposed pressure for inserting women in the governments and parliaments; besides she propagated again the concept of the freedom of women within new forms and new presentations.

In the field of thought and culture, America employed centres for thought, democracy and pluralism; besides she set up organisations for human rights. These centres and organisations would promote the thoughts of freedom within the western concepts and following the American way. These organisations and centres were supported by Hollywood cinema films and advanced technological production, which dominated the propagation of most of the Arab and non Arab channels.

In the field of security, America worked to link the intelligent services in the Arab states and the states of the Islamic world with her intelligent services, particularly with the CIA and FBI. So, we became to see the American intelligence people move with complete freedom in the cities of the Islamic countries, and under legal protection, as it is the case in Sudan, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Libya, Pakistan and other states. This intelligence linkage covered handing over of the accused to America; besides it allowed the special American forces to undertake specific military actions against those described by America as terrorists.

Thus, the American hands reached the joint points of the daily life in the societies of the Islamic countries and the non Islamic societies. She spreads corruption in them as she likes, as she does in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia, even in Latin America, where she deposed the elected president of Haiti, Arstede and expelled him outside his country, and she tries now to depose Chavez, the president of Venezuela, from authority. Thus, America is about to control the affairs of the weak states due to the submission and surrender of their rulers to her.

However, this American hegemony will not remain long; it is rather going to disappear. Despite the American presence in every corner in the world, and despite the cooperation of the rulers and governments with this presence, the increasing hatred of the peoples, particularly the Islamic ones, to America, besides the increasing abhorrence of most of them to the Americans, because of their arrogance, hollow pride and bias towards the Jews, and because of their colonialism and enslavement of others. We say: this increasing hatred and abhorrence will generate opposition and struggle against the American presence everywhere, whether inside or outside its continent. Moreover, the annoyance of the other great states and the attack against their interests due to the arrogance of America, beside her unilateral control over the benefits and her continuous attempts for hegemony, besides her attempt to have monopoly over the management of the international affairs.

The presence of a state built upon the capitalist ideology, which is based on colonialism and exploiting the wealth of others; besides this state leads the world without competition over this leadership; all of this makes the world live in continuous suffering, where its problems continues and its crises follow each other. The tangible American corrupting and perverting of the world, besides her forging of continuous crises in it confirm that.

The hardship and misery of the world resulting from the capitalist states, particularly the USA, will never disappear except by establishing the Khilafah state, which will implement the right and great ideology, Islam, which was revealed by Allah (swt) upon His Messenger (saw) as mercy for mankind. At that moment, the justice of Islam will disclose the ugliness of the capitalism, in terms of its materialistic thought and colonial method. The righteous power of Islam will also demolish the suppression and arrogance of America, and forces her to return to her isolation and her new world, in case that new world remained to her. Then, goodness will spread worldwide, and the world will have a deep sigh after the hardship and misery it lived for long.

5. As regarding the English people, it was prevailed by fishing and ship manufacturing since its existence. Later on, navigation and trade emerged in it. This created in it the character of hunting of the benefits and exploitation, besides the character of the merchant. Due to the small size of the English country, it found it necessary to seek the help of others. This is like the hunters who seek the help of each other inside the oceans; and hardly have they gone out there alone. When the capitalist ideology emerged and they embraced it, the love of benefit became deep rooted in them. This explains how the political life of England, since its start till today, was based on seeking the help of others, and on preparing the bait whenever it wanted to hunt something; whether this was a country it wanted to colonise, or a state it sought its help. Therefore, all of its policy was based on making alliances, formation of blocks and partnership in colonialism. Thus, in the nineteenth century, it associated other states in colonialism, and gave them free reign for colonising some countries, so as to be on its side and defend its own interests. Therefore, it brought France in the Middle East after World War I, so as to stand at its side once there was a danger to the region, and to put it before the danger. So, it was said: England fights till the last French soldier.

Thus, the character of the fish hunters created with it the natural disposition of seeking the help of others for realising its own interests.

There is another natural disposition, which Britain is famous of; rather it is its most known natural dispositions. It is adhering to the old and the rejection of its change or development except slowly and when its change becomes unavoidable. The English people are conservative in the full sense of this word. It has been, since the old times till today, dominated by the old (noble) families, the rich and the owners of huge capital. Though it claims to follow democracy and it is a democratic people, careful investigation shows it is not, and the people has no effect in appointing rulers. Rather, those who appoint the government are the old families and the owners of the monopolies, and not the people. There is no difference in this matter between the old time and the modern age; for its future is still dominated today by the noble families and the capitalists as it was in the past. Since the old times it maliciously opposed every popular movement that comes about in England, and eliminated it by a style of its kind. The revolution of Cromwell, which the English show pride in it is not a popular revolution; it was rather the revolution of the noble families against the popular revolution. At that time, a revolution broke out that aimed at removing the authority of the noble families and the capitalists, and it was about to succeed. So, the noble families conspired against it, and thus they sent Cromwell to start a revolution, in which he demanded of some rights. Many of the people rallied around him, and he achieved to them some of the demands, so he destroyed the revolution and nipped in its bud. The Conservative Party governs England for tens of years; while Labour Party is only a tool used when England wants it, or when there are issues the Conservative Party is unable to solve. In that case Labour Party is brought in so as to be used in their solution. It seems the leaders of Labour Party understood lately this fact, so they tried to adapt themselves. Accordingly, the rotation of the authority between the two parties became like alteration of roles between the Conservative and Labour parties, rather than Labour Party being a tool in the hands of the Conservative party. Therefore, we find Tony Blair, the current leader of the Labour Party and the British Prime Minister had changed the nature of the party and became closer to the policies of the Conservative Party. He appeared in terms of the political image in a way not different to the most prominent members of Conservative Party, to the point he took Margaret Thatcher, the past leader of the Conservative Party as a model to him in foreign and domestic policy. Labour Party itself became also not much different to Conservative Party; and these two parties in Britain became twin brothers to Republic and Democratic parties in America.

If some members of Labour Party itself discovered that England is governed by its noble families and capitalists, then these members would be put under circumstances that lead to removing their influence on the party, and hence from the political influence. The Labour member, Bevin in the period of the thirties until sixties and George Brown in the sixties are the best example for the control of Conservative Party over even Labour Party, and for dismissing those who want to restrict the authority of the government over power. Conservative Party itself does not elect its leadership; rather the past leader appoints the succeeding one, as it happened with Macmillan when he appointed Lord Hume, and when Margaret Thatcher appointed John Major. Though Heath and Major were appointed by election, but this was only formal. Therefore, though the ruling system in England is described as democratic, however it in fact comes through appointment by a specific class, which are the noble families, capitalists and owners of monopolies.

England is an island, and its land does not suffice their livelihood. Therefore, their exit from the island in search for livelihood was unavoidable. Though they went out, but they did so as colonialists rather than merchants. They went out for exploiting the peoples and robbing their wealth, rather than for exchange of commodities. This is because they did not have in the first place wealth to exchange with; they rather went out in search for wealth. This was their case from the moment they left their island. When they embraced capitalist ideology, where benefit is an indivisible part of it, this ideology agreed with their nature. So, the colonial aspect concentrated in them, and thus they became a colonial state of first grade. Since they were also a small people and could not face bigger forces, they addressed this problem through using other peoples and states for helping them. They designed this help in form of blocks, such as alliances, conferences and treaties. Therefore, the structural aspect was an indivisible part of their policy. Though they are normal like other peoples regarding the level of mind brightness, yet they use their mind to its maximum. So, they excelled in understanding actions, understanding politics and solving the problems; and thus they developed the mentality of outstanding problem solution. Due to their pressing need for expansion, they established their industry on the basis of war industry, which led to becoming a true state. They thus acquired a military force, and military machines, together with acquiring industrial power; this is beside their rooted experience in politics and governance, and their cunning that is sometimes closer to malice.

As regarding their foreign policy, it is built on colonialism. However, two matters manifest in it: the first is maintenance of international balance of power; and the second is maintenance of the presence in international politics at any cost. Therefore, they participated distinctly in the crusader wars; besides they were at the forefront of the great states in the sacred alliance. And when Napoleon rushed in his conquests, they led the forces that destroyed him and pushed France back to its previous position. When Germany moved at the time of Bismarck, England participated in the conference of Berlin, where one of its objectives was to restrict the force of Germany. When it felt of an extraordinary increase in the power of Germany, it declared war against it, and fought against it in two world wars. It also tried to attract the entire world into a world war for the sake of changing the map of the world, and for weakening the two superpowers at the time, which they used to control the world at that time during the détente period. When it was removed from the international politics after the agreement of the two superpowers, it looked as if it lost its entity. So it started to act nervously, and desperately try to return to the international arena and to participate in the international politics. It depends on concluding deals with the states and on winning the men and influencing them. It does not mind in giving the opponent a big bait for the sake of making a bargain with him. It does acknowledge a friend or an enemy in politics; it rather acknowledges benefit only and nothing more. It considered that which is known as international ethics as a means of deception, without having belief in it. Though it tried not to be caught lying, so as to create trust in it; however it uses lies as an effective weapon in its politics. Churchill, the Prime Minister of Britain was once in a meeting with Roosevelt and Stalin for discussing the issue of war and the future of Germany. So, some of that which he told them so openly: “truth in war is so expensive to the extent that it is necessary to protect it with a complete army of lies”. This shows the fundamental importance of lies in British politics.

This is the reality of Britain and the reality of its politics. It has to be treated as a colonial state, and as a state that lives at exploiting its people. Time and events did not change this method of its life. Thus, it deceived the popular revolts it undertook, without letting any one to succeed. Opposition of its colonialism is not possible except through understanding its means. Its power lies in the saying of the poet: “cure me with that which was itself a disease”. Its power abroad lies in its use of others in its favour, even using those who oppose it. There is no a possible way to overcome it except through stripping it of its traditional political weapons, and through confronting it alone, without having an assistant or a partner.

6. As regarding the French people, it is a people that formed a deep rooted state in centre of Europe, which boasted over all the states of Europe that the French people is the one that generated the high concepts of freedom, justice and equality. France is well known that it cultivated the extraordinary people in the fields of politics and thought. However, it is a colonial state, which is distinct from other states in terms of the influence of the freedom concepts on it, as being an individual high character that changed to become one of the French natural dispositions, rather one of their inherited innate.

Since the French people adopted freedom as its thought, fragmentation was deep rooted in it. So, it became much closer to be a collection of individuals rather than being a nation, a people or a community. Therefore, there were little strong governments in France, besides there was no strong power in it. This facilitated for England to use France many times. So, France continued to follow England from the time of departure of Napoleon till the time of De’ Gaul. This is because the concept of freedom has taken root in it. Even when France went out for colonialism in America, Asia and Africa, it was England that sent it out so as to seek strengthen with it, despite competition between the two states used to float on the surface in the colonial history of the two countries.

Therefore, one cannot decide that the French people have any characteristic more than freedom. For the intellectual freedom created philosophers, poets and intellectuals besides others. Political freedom created dignity, pride and self confidence, which created a great multitude of outstanding people. While the personal freedom made of Paris habitat of lewdness, debauchery and dash into whims and lust. Freedom had also created gaps in France that helped foreigners, particularly the English to infiltrate in it. Thus, freedom, in its absolute meaning is the source of evil in France.

One cannot claim there are such and such parties in France, and that party is such and such, while the other is such and such. This is because it is difficult for parties, in their actual party sense, to exist in such a people; there are rather collections of individuals that call themselves parties. Therefore, it is difficult to have a strong authority or a stable government in France. For each French is a ruler by himself, besides each French yearns to become a ruler. Therefore, one cannot say the domestic French policy is such and such, and the foreign policy is such and such. Rather, the domestic policy would be according the taste of the rulers and their understanding of freedom. Likewise the foreign policy would be according to the power of France in dominating the others for colonising them and extending its influence over them. France is considered a colonial state because it embraced the capitalist ideology. Benefit is a fundamental part of the life of France; therefore it was bent on colonialism and eager to maintain its colonies.

If it was necessary to give a view about the foreign policy of France, it has to be noticed that its policy is based upon creating influence abroad, whether it was through colonies, cultural influence or economic influence. Its political actions against the great states include the manifestation of its character and participation in glory and suppression. It cannot handle political manoeuvres nicely; it rather generally refers to confrontation. This makes it easy to discover the struggle between it and America at this time, while it is difficult to discover such American struggle with other states, particularly with Britain. Therefore, the course of confronting its actions should avoid hurting its pride, and preventing it from taking the initiative; besides it should not be accepted as a great state except within the limit agreed by the great states in the international politics.

7. As regarding the Russian people, it is active, with vitality and strength, but with naivety and simplicity as well. Though it embraced firstly the capitalist ideology, then secondly the communism and returned back to capitalist ideology, it remained behind Europe, without being able to reach the level of European peoples. So Russians developed within them the complex problem towards the Europeans, which created negative effect with it.

Russian people is a brave and good fighter, but inside its own
country. However, once it went outside its country it lost its characteristics. Therefore, it was expected since long ago that it will lose its control over the states of East Europe. Now, it actually lost this control after the collapse of the SU. The historic facts confirm the Russian people did not win outside its country in all the historic events. Its current stalemate in Chechnya, the small country confirms this fact. However, it managed to defeat its enemy when it was attacked inside its country, as it happened against Napoleon and Hitler.

Ruling system at time of Caesars is different to that at time of communists, and to that at current time. However, it was all the time autocratic. Caesar used to particularly rely upon the land feudalist, while the big landlords used to ally with the rich over the lands, as masters. They used to give full support to the Caesar’s domestic and foreign policies; and they together used to make the ugliest exploit of the people that led to the decline of the country and the backwardness of the people.

Russia was behind Europe before World War I, and it was exploited by some European countries. The main industries in Russia were in the hands of France, England and Belgium. The main mining factories were in the hands of French; the coal industry in Donitz basin was in the hands of the foreigners, and about half of the oil wells were in the hands of the English and French. A great part of the profits that came from the Russian industry used to go to foreign banks, particularly the English and French banks. The country was till 1914 declined in the systems of ruling, economy, culture and education. Despite that Russia was a great state; and it was considered internationally one of the great powers, and used to influence international politics. When communist party seized authority, the ruling did not change except in terms of style. The communists governed the country with an iron fist, where they used killing, suppression and intimidation. Thus, they built their authority over the skulls of the people. Russia managed to force the leading state to abandon the concept of its fight, and entered in pacts with her till it almost became her ally. Thus, SU was an associate with the leading state in running the world; rather the two super powers, SU and USA dominated the whole world. As regarding the policy of communist Russia, it was built on the basis of the thought. Its thought was propagating communism; while its method was destruction, demolition and provoking contradictory things. This policy tried, whenever it were possible to insert communism in some countries; besides it tried to dominate the countries that took communism as their ruling system.

After the collapse of communism, the Russian people as well as its leaders found it necessary to have an identity different to Russia of the Caesars and that of the communist period; so, they resorted to capitalism. Thus, they were like the one that jumps from the frying pan into the fire; where they increased in poverty, the image of Russia was shaken, besides its position in the world.

Ruling system in Russia became capitalist, and like its form at the time of Caesars, just keeping some features from the communist period. Thus, the capitalist class and owners of huge wealth emerged. They had their influence on ruling exactly as it was the case at the time of Caesars. However, this time instead from being governed by the Caesars, it is governed by the people of the Soviet KGB (intelligence service) and the old communist politicians, who only changed their skin colour and became of new fashion capitalists.

Its foreign policy focused only on having a role, without having a world viewpoint about the foreign policy. Therefore, its presence on the international domain disappeared, and it started to only search for any role, and not to be completely marginalised in the international politics. This situation in terms of losing the ideological intellectual identity by the Russian people, besides the situation of political bankruptcy at the level of the leaders and Russian people, provides the opportunity for confronting the policies of Russia, through establishing trade relations with Russia that enable Muslims to enter Russia, and enable the Russians to see Islam alive in the people relations. There must also be resistance to the attempts of Russia for influencing international politics by depriving it of the opportunity to do so. Relations with it should be confined to trade aspect, resisting at the same time relations in other areas, the same as with all capitalist states. This is because its foreign policy is built upon exploitation and colonialism; though this does not appear except in the neighbour countries.

The last four peoples, ie the American, the English, the French and the Russian people are the peoples of the states that are considered currently great states. These peoples have ambition for controlling and competing for international politics in numerous regions in the world, taking in consideration the disparity between them in terms of strength and weakness. Through examining their influence in the international politics in the 21st century it is possible to summarise the general political guidelines of the four states as follows:

America has increased its force with quick pace since the sudden collapse of the SU. She became the superpower that has the strongest influence in the world, particularly there was no great state capable to fill the vacuum it left behind, till America became an unconstrained superpower. There is no state among the present great states that was capable till this moment to reach the second degree state that was occupied by the SU. This strange situation in international stance, which enabled America to tower over others made the American politicians incline to haughtiness and arrogance in their dealing with others. The foreign secretary at time of Clinton, Madeline Albright might express about this case when she said: “America is the necessary nation and she has the international responsibilities; besides she is ready to do everything any time she wants. Let everybody knows that we do whatever we like and change whatever we like. There are no obstacles in our way, because the world is ours; the world is for the Americans”.

This arrogance and haughtiness of the American politics provoked even the Europeans who were her allies to reject her haughtiness and those statements that carried the arrogant American tone. Therefore, they responded to her through their press that expressed their annoy towards her. The French newspaper (Le Mond Diplomatique) reacted to the statement of Albright by saying: “The American hegemony must not be an unavoidable destiny. America must understand from now on that she will not be able to impose her laws upon the five continents in accordance with here interests only. Likewise she will not be the police of the world forever in the regions of crises and struggle”.

Thus, America embarks in her politics from her viewpoint that she owns the world, she is worthier of it and more suited of it. She declares always, openly and explicitly that she is the leader of the world as Bush said during his election campaign in the states of America in August 2004. She always declares projects designed for the world, like (new world), (new Middle East), (the Major Middle East), beside others. However, this haughtiness and arrogance of America will bring to her evil consequences; we see even the signs of this have started. We see America is drowning in the predicament of Afghanistan and Iraq; and her reputation has been despised and humiliated. Despite her crimes of blind bombardment of the civilians and her brutal and horrible actions in the prisons, she started to send back the dead bodies of her soldiers to their homeland in America after their killing in Afghanistan and Iraq. Besides, the peoples of the region became furious against her due to the ugliness of her crimes that reached humans, trees, stones, and even the programs of education, media and thought.

Europe, Asia, and Africa were also displeased of that which USA has done, in terms of looting their wealth, constant aggression against the country and the people, and the American attempt to have unilateral hegemony over the entire regions of the world.

Thus, the American politics is distinguished, on one side with arrogance, haughtiness, diversity of crimes and her view to the world as their own ranch. On the other side, it is distinguished with great hatred and severe abhorrence of all the peoples of the world, their enemies and even their previous friends. All of this tells of a painful end to America, and a heinous collapse like all the tyrants of the world.

As regarding Britain, it put one leg in Europe and the other in America, where it is under two tendencies: European tendencies and Anglo-Saxon ones; so it tries to maintain balance between these two.

This balance became the basis of its relation with each of Europe and America. So, it plays on both robes, and benefits of both sides. It seeks strength with Europe as it does that with America at the same time. It can neither abandon America and nor dissociate itself from Europe. However, its interests tend more towards Europe. Therefore, we see it approach Europe more and more with time. Its entry to the EU is evidence to that. Britain participated lately in the formation of the European army, independent from the NATO pact. It has done that in cooperation with France and Germany despite the strong objection of America to that. This is the European policy of Britain, and this is the angle from which its political actions in Europe embark.

As regarding France, it is different to Britain; for it builds its policies on pure European basis, without giving any attention to America. It tries to strengthen the EU and tries to dominate it so that it becomes a united European political power, completely independent from America. It wants it to be an equivalent rival to the American power, in terms of all the political, economic, military and cultural aspects, without being confined to economy or to formal political cooperation.

France uses its rapprochement with Germany as the corner stone in realising this policy, to the extent it considers the French-German axis the foundation of this unionist European policy.

This is the European policy of France; which is of a clear, independent, and challenging nature that makes of France and Germany the heart of the European force and the true motivator of it.

As regarding Russia, its current policies towards Europe are manifested in two issues:

First: It is the entry to the European states, and association in the discussion of the European matters, on equal terms. It succeeded in that partially, where it managed to join the European Council and the group of G7. However, it did not succeed in joining the EU or even to be nominated for entering it.

Second: It is the attempt to maintain a distinguished relationship with the sates that were in the past a part of the SU, and the states that were in its camp, such that it becomes a relation of constant guardianship. It badly failed in this matter, for it lost completely its control over all states of East Europe, which are: Bulgaria, Romania, Check, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary and Yugoslavia fragmented states. It started also to lose part of its authority over Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Ukraine, White Russia, Moldavia and Muslim Central Asia republics. Its full control remained only over Kazakhstan. Besides, it early lost all of its control over the three Baltic States, which are: Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.

In brief, the European policy of Russia is that it was not qualified, from European pointview, to the degree it planned and endeavoured for it. Perhaps, it could not achieve that because it is Euro-Asian state, ie European and Asian, so it cannot claim it is completely European. Consequently, it cannot ignore its extensive Asian space, and nor abandon its huge relations and interests with the Europeans. Thus, it is preoccupied in defining its extensive vital space, which causes its confusion that makes it unable to focus on the European side only.

Thus, we have been acquainted with the peoples of the great states (America, Britain, France and Russia), as well as (the Islamic ummah) whose great state, the guided Khilafah is about to return, in addition to the German people, which is expected to return as a great state, no matter how long this might take. We then talked about the Japanese people due to its great economic influence.

The full book is available from Revival Publications

Monday, December 25, 2006

Representation (Al-Wilaayah) & Delegation (Al-Wekaalah) in Islam

Every Mukallaf (i.e. mature and sane person) is considered to be one of the following:

- The Original Al-Aseel i.e. the one who represents him/herself.
- The Representative Al-Wakeel i.e. the one who represents another person
- The Next of kin (Al-Waliy) i.e. the one who is responsible for others e.g. the father or the Khaleefah.
- The Guardian Al-Wassiy i.e. the one who is responsible for a child or a disabled person ( i.e.Al-Qaaser).

The Shari'ah holds the Mukallaf (him/her) as an Aseel: the one who is responsible for his/her own affairs and duties and Islam gives every Aseel the Wilaayah (power of self-representation). However the Shari'ah does give one a permit to delegate certain responsibilities to someone else to represent him or her. This requires us to understand the principle of Representation
Al-Wilaayah in Islam and its divisions and types.

The Divisions of Representation Al-Wilaayah: Representation Al-Wilaayah is of two divisions:

1. Self Representation (Al-Wilaayah Al-Asseelah)
2. Appointed Representation (Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah)

1. Self Representation Al-Wilaayah Al-Asseelah: In order to be Asseel i.e. to represent yourself, you must be Raashed (i.e. rational, competent) and not Qaaser (i.e. a child or disabled without any two of the following: sight, hearing or speech.)

2. Appointed Representation Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah: Appointed Representation is of two types:

a. Without choice Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah Al-Ijbaariyyah
b. With choice Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah Al-Ikhtiyariyyah

Without choice Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah Al-Ijbaariyyah: Appointed Representation without choice is appointment over life's affairs Wilaayat-ul-Nafis, for example the Representation of the father over the marriage of his daughter, or it is appointment over wealth Wilaayat-ul-Maal, for example a representative appointed over the wealth of a child or the wealth of someone who is insane.

With choice Al-Wilaayah Al-Niyaabiyyah Al-Ikhtiyariyyah: Appointed Representation with choice (i.e. delegation Al-Wekaalah) is also of two types: Specific Khaassah or General Aammah and these can be either un-restricted Muttlaqah or restricted Muqayyadah.

Specific Khaassah: For example you can delegate someone to sell your car and this could be: a) un-restricted Muttlaqah: e.g. [sell it for how much they think it should sell for.] b) restricted Muqayyadah: e.g. [sell it for no less that 5000.]

General Aammah: For example you can delegate someone to deal with your property and this could be: a) un-restricted Muttlaqah: e.g. [deal with everything regarding it.] b) restricted Muqayyadah: e.g. [manage it but do not sell it.]

Delegation (Al-Wekaalah): Delegation Al-Wekaalah has four pillars:
1. The Delegator (Al-Muwakkil) .
2. The Delegatee (Al-Wakeel).
3. The Wording of the Delegation Seeghat-ut-Tawkeel.
4. The Subject of the Delegation (Al-Muwakkal feeh).

1. The Delegator (Al Muwakkil): The conditions for the Delegator Al-Muwakkil are: The Delegator must be Sane (Aaqil) The Delegator must be Mature (Baalegh) The Delegator must be Competent (Raashed i.e. not Qaaser) The Delegator must only delegate that which is permissible by Shari'ah. The Delegator must own the thing or have the right he/she wishes to delegate. The Absence of any divine prevention's (Ghiyaab ul-Mawaani Ash-Shar'iyyah).

2. The Delegatee (Al-Wakeel): The conditions for the Delegatee Al-Wakeel are: The Delegatee must be Sane (Aaqil). The Delegatee must be Mature (Baalegh). The Delegatee must be Competent (Raashed i.e. not with a severe disability or Qaaser). The Delegatee must accept only the delegation, which is permissible by Shari'ah. The Delegatee must accept only the delegation, which is open for representation by Shari'ah. The Absence of any divine prevention's (Ghiyaab ul-Mawaani Ash-Shar'iyyah).

3. The Wording (Form) of the Delegation (Seeghat-ut-Tawkeel): The conditions for the Wording of the delegation Seeghat-ut-Tawkeel are: There must be an offer and acceptance between the Delegator and the Delegatee. There must be no duress upon either party. There must be no ambiguity in the Wording. i.e. it must be clear as to the delegation i.e. whether it is specific or general and restricted or un-restricted. The Absence of any divine prevention's (Ghiyaab-ul-Mawaani Ash-Shar'iyyah).

4. The Subject of Delegation (Al-Muwakkal feeh): The conditions for the subject of delegation Al Muwakkal feeh are: It must be known to the Delegatee and present if it is a thing. e.g. [represent me in the meeting] or [sell my car for $5000]. It must be delegatable by Shari'ah e.g. to sell, buy, contract or donate etc.. It must be in the area of permissibility by Shari'ah e.g. it is not allowed to ask someone to oppress, to sell alcohol, to attack someone or to legislate law etc. The Absence of any divine prevention's (Ghiyaab-ul-Mawaani Ash-Shar'iyyah).

Evidence for delegation (Al-Tawkeel): The evidence for delegation is mentioned in the Hadeeth of Abu Daoud and Tirmidhi narrated upon the authority of Haakim bin Hizam that Rasool Allah (SAW) delegated Haakim to buy for him (SAW) a sheep and in the Hadeeth narrated by Imam Ahmad and Bukhari upon the authority of Urwa that the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) delegated his father Abu Urwa Al-Bariqi to buy for him a sheep and to offer it as Qurbani. It is further narrated by Abu Daoud in Vol. 1 Hadeeth No. 468 that the Messenger Muhammad (SAW) delegated Amru bin Umayyah Ad-Damuri to conduct on behalf of him the contract of marriage to Umm Habeebah, the daughter of Abu Sufyan, while she was in Abyssinnia. In addition the Prophet (SAW) delegated to many of the state departments someone to manage the affairs e.g. to collect Zakat, distribute wealth, to remove disputes etc.. Islam also permits one to pay the Delegatee some money. It is narrated from Abu Daoud and Tirmidhi upon the authority of Urwa that the Messenger Muhammad (SAW) used to delegate people to manage the affairs of others and would specify for them some revenue.

These evidences are sufficient for the permissibility of delegation within the aforementioned conditions e.g. for the subject of delegation not to be prohibited in Islam and the Delegatee not to indulge in any prohibited transaction e.g. legislation (whether beneficial or not), aggression or Kufr etc. and Allah (SWT) says: "Those who do not judge (rule or refer) to whatever Allah reveals, they are the disbelievers". [TMQ 5:45]

It is agreed upon among the classical scholar's e.g. Al-Imaam Al-Maqdisi, Al-Imaam Al-Kasani and Al-Imaam Al-Quraafi etc.. that those who delegate in any matter prohibited by Islam (e.g. selling alcohol or voting for man-made law) or delegate a person who is not trustworthy or Kaafir will share with the Delegatee the sin and punishment.

Iran and North Korea standoff exposes US NPT policy

By Abid Mustafa

On 23/12/06 the UN Security Council voted unanimously to impose sanction against Iran's nuclear programme. The key aspects of the resolution were a) Ban on import and export of nuclear-related material and b) Assets frozen of 10 companies and 12 individuals.

Although the resolution was passed under Chapter 7 Article 41, which renders enforcement obligatory there was no mention of military force in the event of Iran’s non-compliance with demands stipulated by the UNSC.

The resolution was passed after it had been considerably watered down from its initial draft. Both Russia and China objected to key points in the resolution drafted by the EU-3, as Moscow and Beijing manoeuvred to protect their commercial interests in Iran. But there are a couple of additional factors that have motivated the two erstwhile enemies to band together and stand firm against the US.

First, both countries perceive Ahmadinejad to be acting independently from the US and this has spurred them on to engage Iran. This is despite the fact that most of Iran’s institutions and instruments of power are firmly in the hands of American agents through which the US secures its foreign policy goals in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. The US has further weakened Ahmadinejad by bolstering the credentials of Khatami and Rafsanjani in the Assembly of Experts and the Municipal elections. But none of this has lessened Moscow and Beijing’s enthusiasm to embrace Ahmadinejad.

Second, Russia and China do not want to appear as frightened spectators, as they were in the run up to the gulf war in 2003. Today, both countries sense that America has been weakened by its occupation in Iraq and want to make the prospect of attacking Iran as difficult as possible.

From the EU’s perspective they had little choice, but to draft the resolutions as it was a condition imposed on the EU-3 in return for US supporting half-hearted economic incentives to placate Tehran in exchange for halting uranium enrichment. As far as the Bush administration is concerned, America’s security is inextricably linked to Israel’s security, and as long as Bush is under the influence of the Israeli lobby and the neoconservatives, Bush is reluctant to soften its stance on Iran’s nuclear programme. Speaking on this matter the Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns said, “We don't think this resolution is enough in itself. We want to let the Iranians know that there is a big cost to them.”

Nevertheless, the dismissal of Rumsfeld and Bolton, and the selection of Gates as the new secretary of defence, signals that an intense debate between realists and neoconservatives is underway over Tehran’s nuclear programme.

On 7/12/06 during his Senate confirmation, Gates mentioned why Iran might be seeking the means to build an atomic bomb: “They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons: Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west and us in the Persian Gulf.”

The admission by Gates that Israel is in possession of nuclear weapons is an attempt to shift the debate amongst US policy makers that the nuclear issue should be made part of the comprehensive settlement of the Middle East. Unless the US includes Israel as part of a nuclear free Middle East; other countries in the region will want to become nuclear. The GCC countries have already made their intentions known.

As for the six party talks regarding North Korea’s nuclear programme, they were destined to fail from the outset. This is because America is adamant not to lift economic sanction imposed on Pyongyang. The Bush administration believes that the financial sanctions will eventually cripple Kim’s regime. Furthermore the US is doing its utmost to eschew the signing of a security pact with North Korea, and this is further complicating matter between the two countries. Again the US wants to reserve the option of applying military force to change North Korea’s behaviour.

For North Korea the removal of financial sanctions and security pledges are essential before Pyongyang rescinds its nuclear weapons programme. Unless America is prepared to compromise tactically on these issues it is almost inevitable that Pyongyang will conduct another atomic test to coerce the US to make some concessions.

To sum up the US has not only failed to curb the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea, but has also made the world a dangerous place to live in. By signing a nuclear deal with India in violation of the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) and not lifting a finger to reign in Israel’s atomic weapons, more and more countries will follow Iran and North Korea in a bid to nuclearize.

Thanks to the Bush administration, America now stands on the verge of becoming the worlds biggest proliferate of nuclear technology.

Abid Mustafa is a political commentator who specialises in Muslim affairs