Skip to main content

Political Analysis about Rice's visit to Central Asia

The following is the draft translation of a political analysis article written in Arabic.

Question: Rice visited Central Asia on 13-14.10.2005 and met the presidents of those countries, also with the president of Russia towards the end of her visit on 15.10.2005, but he who follows the declarations after the visit, perceives as if America had lost the tour in most of the former soviet republics, does that mean that Russia held the reigns of taking the initiative again, after it had lost the reigns when it lost Georgia and Ukraine?

Answer: The interest of America with what is called the Independent countries, that is the republics which were separated from the old Soviet Union after disengagement (Armenia, Azerbaijan, White Russia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldavia, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan) besides the three Baltic countries which were separated before from the Union, this American interest started a while after the disengagement of the Soviet Union and specifically after the issuing of what is called the law of supporting freedom which the American Congress issued on 03.01.1992. The law stated two important items:

The First: to support the spreading of (freedom and democracy) in these countries as a means to penetrate into it and to open its markets for the American companies and the Second: the desire of America to control the reserve of the huge energy in the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea, and
also to control the manner of transporting it, the emphasis was on the republics of Central Asia more than others.

Yet pursuing the execution of the law was slow in the administration of Clinton, but the results of the law started to show in the administration of Bush especially in his second period that is in 2004, when he appointed Rice in the post of Foreign Minister and she is an expert in the Russian affair, besides appointing her acting minister Zolek and her assistant Nicholas Burns, they both are also experts in the Russian affair. The first results of this was what was called the colored revolutions in Georgia then Ukraine.

These two revolutions stirred the appetite of America to knock the doors of Russia strongly, especially that America had used before the incidents of 11 September 2001 to originate military basis for it in some of the countries of Central Asia, such as Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, all this pushed America to go forward in the novelty of colored revolutions. But Russia realized this game of colored revolutions and cut the road in front of America in Kyrgyzstan and succeeded in getting hold of the situation. Then it started to stir the fears of the presidents of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, that the American slogans in supporting freedom and democracy are meant to remove them from rule and to bring others, similar to the colored revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine, this is besides that Russia assisted Karimov in Uzbekistan during the incidents of Andigan, supported him against America and the European Union who demanded an investigation committee for the incidents of Andigan. Then Russia and Uzbekistan had for the first time mutual military exercises on 23.09.2005. All this originated strong basis for Russia and hindrances and thorns in the path of America towards these countries, especially that some economical relations and the supplies of oil and gas were still integrated between Russia and these republics since the Soviet Union.

The result of that was; that Uzbekistan asked from America to withdraw its military base in July 2005 and gave it a time limit of six months, and decided to close the office of the American Internews Agency which was established in 1995. Then Tajikistan announced last September that it will not allow the Americans to establish a base in it, that was an answer to the news which slipped about the intention of America to move its base from Uzbekistan to Tajikistan. That was accompanied by the announcement of Tajikistan that it will allow Russia to establish a new base for it in Doshmi to accommodate six thousand soldier. This made Russia dare to do what it couldn’t dare before, and began to hear from the Russian officials declarations about the American military bases in Central Asia, and the necessity to put an end for its stay in the region, as was stated in the declaration of the Russian Foreign Minister Sergi Lavrov on 17.10.2005, after that the organization of Shanghai met in Moscow on 26.10.2005, reports slipped out of it, that they discussed establishing a military alliance, which will have a great effect on the presence of the American bases in the region.

All of that made America fear on what it had built in Central Asia from collapsing, so it accomplished a hot activity in several directions, the visit of Rice to Kazakhstan on 13.10.2005 and to Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan and which she ended in Russia on 10.15.2005, had a new method, she tries to aggravate the origination of antagonist powers similar to those of Georgia and Ukraine, and at the same time tries to get close to the presidents of those countries and to eliminate their suspicion towards her, meaning that she began to (mix) in her declarations between the relations with the presidents of these countries and realizing her interests with them, and between the slogan of freedom and democracy, to the extent that the opposition started to notice that, for example, when rice visited Kazakhstan, the opposition accused her that she is putting her interests with the presidents instead of the democratic alteration, the opposition gave the example of the huge American investments which it contracted with
the governments, but Rice denied that.

This is from one side, from another side, America was concerned in originating alliances in the region of the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea, it sponsored exercises for the countries which overlook these two seas except Russia and Iran, it included Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldavia, Romania, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine. It meant from these alliances to originate old and new support on which it will lean in order to re-penetrate any country in Central Asia, which may slip from its hands.

The conclusion is that Russia and America are in hot struggle in Central Asia, each of them realizes that it has support and interest there, non of them -until now- holds all the strings in the region, the tour of Rice was part of the tug -of- war game between the two countries, it seems that she originated a pressing movement which made Russia re-consider its accounts, that is why upon the visit of the American vice president of the National Security affairs Steven Harely to Moscow on 24.10.2005, the Russian Foreign Minister Lafrov declared that his country and the United States intend to activate exchanging opinions concerning the conditions in the former Soviet republics. This means that the reigns are still in a state of pulling and drawing between the two countries, and did not slip yet from the hand of one of them to the hand of the other.

07 Shawal 1426 AH
09 November 2005 CE

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran