Connect with us

Religion

Sundry Reflections on the Politics of Religion

Published

on

[yt_dropcap type=”square” font=”” size=”14″ color=”#000″ background=”#fff” ] R [/yt_dropcap] ecently we have been witnessing in the media a veritable plethora of news- articles regarding the Orthodox branch of Christianity (comprising some 300 millions or one eight per cent of the global total number of Christians). Some pundits of religion have called it a veritable propaganda offensive to popularize Orthodoxy around the world. What is going on? Is it mere propaganda, or what? To begin to understand this phenomenon one needs to review, even if cursorily, the record on the relationship religion/politics as experienced first in Europe and later globally.

There is little doubt that religion has always represented, from primordial times, a powerful cultural force unifying diverse and disparate people. It seems to be a permanent feature of human nature of conceiving one’s identity. Jung, who had studied most of the major ones and researched them all over the world for psychological reasons, arriving at the concept of archetypes which they all seem to possess, is known to have observed that “throw religion out the door and it will come back through the back window as a pernicious cult of sort or an ideology.” It seems to be indispensable, even in practical political life, even in places where a powerful ideology controls every aspect of a people’s life. This is what terrorists have grasped while those who condemn anybody who practices a religion, or any religion for that matter, as an unenlightened retrograde obscurantist (Voltaire was one of those “enlightened” men) have failed to realize a very simple philosophical principle of Thomas Aquinas: the abuse does not obviate the use.

In effect, the ideology often enough sees itself in conflict with religion, which it considers just another misguided unenlightened rival ideology, and persecutes it or makes it illegal. We saw that phenomenon in the Soviet Union between 1917 and 1989); we continue to see it in China today where Communism is still holds the reigns of political power. Going back to ancient times, we saw that in the persecution of the Christians in Rome. They were persecuted for being perceived as competing ideologues subversive to the imperialistic interests of the Roman Empire, refusing to serve in the Roman army. All that changed once the Empire became Christian under Constantine. But we’ll return to that.

Besides Christianity, with which most people in the West are vaguely familiar, since by now good old paganism seems to be on its way back, one thinks of Islam which managed to unify the various wandering tribes of the Desert into one powerful civilization, in some ways superior, at the time at least, even to that of the West still struggling to emerge from the Dark Ages following the fall of the Roman Empire (the superiority residing in medicine and architecture, and, to some extent, philosophy). One thinks of Confucianism and Buddhism which did the same in the Far East, giving rise to the hegemony of Chinese and Japanese civilization in the area. One thinks of Hinduism unifying the whole Indian subcontinent. And the list goes on. With no religion, the tendency seems to be for centrifugal forces to take over and destroy any sign of unity and adherence to common values and traditions.

Historically, we know that beginning with the third century AD the Roman Empire, with the advent of semi-deranged emperors such as Caligula and Nero the Roman Empire, at least in its western part, appeared doomed to decline and eventual destruction, as in fact happened eventually. The political genius of a Constantine resides in the fact that he became increasingly aware that religion could be the force that would keep the centrifugal forces at work in the Empire, at bay for a while; a sort of cultural glue. So he embraces Christianity and basically requires that everybody in the Empire become a Christian. To refuse was equivalent to showing disrespect for the Emperor. People remembered too well the fate of those Christians who refused to throw incense at the statue of the Emperor.

In effect, you now have a Christian empire with the Emperor as the supreme ruler in temporal matters while the Pope is the supreme ruler in spiritual matters. It seemed to be a perfect arrangement and it did in fact keep the Empire going for a while longer. The problem was that the unity was so powerful and unshackled that the crucial distinction between spiritual matters and temporal matters began to disappear. In medieval times the power of the Church reached a culminating point when a bishop could be both a temporal ruler and a spiritual leader.

The Pope allegedly inherited one third of Italy, the very center of the peninsula, from Constantine, the so called “donation of Constantine,” in reality this was a fraudulent claim. Dante puts three Popes in hell for failing to distinguish the temporal from the spiritual. This state of affairs persists till the 16th century. In Italy it does not end till the 19th century when Italy becomes a unified country and the Pope is stripped of all temporal power, except for a symbolical vestige named Vatican City (see Giuseppe di Lampedusa’s novel Il Gattopardo), given to him, almost nobles oblige, by the dictator Benito Mussolini. Thus the principle of separation of temporal power and spiritual power was upheld in some form and everybody saved face.

In the eastern part of the Roman Empire, the so called Byzantine Empire, with its capital in Constantinople (present day Istanbul), things go on as usual for another thousand years or so, with the patriarch of Constantinople in charge of spiritual affairs and the eastern Emperor in charge of temporal affairs. In effect the one who called the shots, even in spiritual matters, was the one who held the temporal power and controlled the army: the Emperor. The patriarch, an equal with within the descendants of the apostles, which includes the bishop of Rome, the Pope, was merely the representative and the defender of the faith; a spiritual function. In more pragmatic Machiavellian terms, however, the real defender of the faith was the Byzantine Roman army which in the 4th crusade failed to defend the city from the invading Christians from the West on their way to free Jerusalem from the infedel Moslems. On passant, they did a little pillaging in Constantinople, a Christian city. So much for spiritual values and the brotherhood of all Christian, not to speak of that of all humans…Even the Pope at the time was horrified by this gross event and exclaimed about the Crusaders’ army: “no wonder the Greeks call them dogs.”

To continue the narration, Hagias Sophia’s, the largest and most beautiful Church in the world at the time, remained is a Christian Church till the end of the Byzantine Empire and the advent of the Ottoman Empire in the 15th century. It is now a museum surrounded by minarets. Obviously there are religious wars, and they spill over into cultural wars, better known as Crusades, and there are winners and there are losers, but religion (be it Christian or be it Moslem) remains a powerful cement to keep people’s allegiance, even patriotism, alive and well and to better camouflage one’s real political intentions.

Some have said that the problem with religion is that it produces too many fanatics; and such an opinion may express a valid point. But this can only be so in as much as religion too can be interpreted and presented as just another political ideology. When that happens, religions tend to vie with each other as ideologies have tended to do from time immemorial. Enter Marx with his “religion is the opium of the people” or Mao with his “religion is poison.” The Machiavellian stratagem of the more astute politicians among us is to manipulate them and pit one against the other. One uses them as ideological tools while remaining in control and pulling the political string at all times. One manages to promote one’s ideology, civilization, even nationalism through religion. One manages even to appear pious and holy.

For example at the recent meeting in Moscow to honor the 70th birthday of its Orthodox patriarch Cyril, a letter of invitation was sent out inviting all the Orthodox patriarchs together with the most important figures of the Orthodox Church. None of them failed to show up, albeit some came more enthusiastically and more entourage than others. This was hailed by some orthodox Christians as a great show of unity and cooperation within the Orthodox Church, even a good omen and a joyous prelude to eventual reunion with the Western Catholic Church. What seems to be forgotten is that the celebration took place in Moscow and the invitation had the blessing, so to speak, of a pious orthodox Christian who often goes on pilgrimages to Orthodox sacred places, while at the same time gobbling up Crimea, or parts of Ukraine or part of Georgia while eyeing the Baltic countries, former satellites of the Soviet Union with large Russian populations of which he has proclaimed himself the champion. It appears that none dared to disrespect the blessing of such a pious but powerful member of the Orthodox Church, or even impugn his real motives.

You get the point. We are talking here about the politics of religion. Like Constantine, one can use religion for one’s ideological and political agenda. Since Communism as it is, can no longer be revived in Russia, probably not even in Italy, one can still bring back the past glories of Russia as expressed via the Orthodox Church and showing the great respect for traditional values, all lost in those Epicurean hedonistic societies in the European Union and the United States of America. One may even be able to convince oneself, with all those yearly holy pilgrimages, that one is a genuine peace-loving Christian and not a mere astute ideologue. It worked quite well for Constantine; why should it not work for Mr. Putin? But Christ’s injunction remains: “By their fruits you shall know them.” So, keep your eyes and ears open.

Professor Paparella has earned a Ph.D. in Italian Humanism, with a dissertation on the philosopher of history Giambattista Vico, from Yale University. He is a scholar interested in current relevant philosophical, political and cultural issues; the author of numerous essays and books on the EU cultural identity among which A New Europe in search of its Soul, and Europa: An Idea and a Journey. Presently he teaches philosophy and humanities at Barry University, Miami, Florida. He is a prolific writer and has written hundreds of essays for both traditional academic and on-line magazines among which Metanexus and Ovi. One of his current works in progress is a book dealing with the issue of cultural identity within the phenomenon of “the neo-immigrant” exhibited by an international global economy strong on positivism and utilitarianism and weak on humanism and ideals.

Religion

Islamophobia and Western World

Published

on

“How Islamophobia developed in west and how it built track towards influencing life of common man?”

In this research paper we are going to conduct a research on Islamophobia, its causes, its impact. First aim is to define and explain phobia. Define and explain  Islamophobia. Its main causes. How attacks of 9/11 influenced the lives of Muslims. Caricatures of Holy Prophet displayed in a school of France and magazine “Charlie Hebdo”. Consequences of Islamophobia are the main topics. In this paper I’ve brightened the aspects leading to Islamophobia, change of policies for Muslims in France.

WHAT IS PHOBIA?

A Phobia is an extreme fear of something. It may be an anxiety disorder in which fear of something is expressed. There are many factors that trigger a phobia, these factors may be environmental or genetic. But here we are talking about worldly phobia.

WHAT WE CALL, “ISLAMOPHOBIA

There is a great debate on Islamophobia. If we talk about Islamophobia which is a very considerable phobia or fear for the west. Islamophobia according to western people is hatred and prejudice against Muslims. Islamophobia is a phrase used to describe baseless malice and agitation or hatred towards Islam, Muslims, and Islamic culture. It also throws light on discrimination that is faced by Muslims. Muslims face violence on daily bases. Circadian, they are victimized. Examples may vary from region to region, the way Muslims are treated and how arduous it is for them to face all the pessimism.

Commonplace, Muslims are attacked, their properties are attacked, their rights are violated, they face threats of violence. Muslims are blackmailed. Muslims face biased attitude at schools, workplaceand they also go through religion bigotry. Despite of all the endowment of Muslims, they are denounced and stigmatized. In a few recent years the terminology of Islamophobia gained vast popularity in west. Muslim minorities colonizing Europe face many issues on daily basis. This term spread widely in European countries in 2007. It was the after shock of economic crisis of 2007. They terrorists Muslims ( Muslim extremists)  which proved to be fuel to the fire.

Muslim minorities in Europe have always been manifested in a wrong order. It is portrayed that Muslims want to isolate themselves. Due to this wrong image of Muslims that is being portrayed, they are not given indistinguishable rights at work places, school and other business sites.

About 20 million Muslims live in Europe. These Muslims are viewed as a threat to European culture and their ways of spending life. The word Islamophobia has become a part of political discourse due is all because of researches  and citations of British and western think tanks. This term gains a number of critics. Western concept of Islam is only one-way street. Western people and leaders criticize Islamic values openly but they pay no consideration to frame of mind of Muslims.

ATTACKS OF 9/11

The 9/11 arsonist attacks exceptionally altered slant of public towards Muslims. Thenceforth, arsonist acts, the attacks by deadly jihadists in London, Paris, Brussels, and Barcelona have escalated trepidation. Aftermath of all these attacks by Muslim extremists, Muslims are regarded as terrorists by Europeans and they view Islam as a threat. The attack of 9/11 on twin tower was considered as an attack by Muslims, since then, Muslims are considered to bean ultimatum. Many changes were felt following these attacks. These terrible attacks left a horrific effect on Muslims. Muslims were considered as pessimists. President of the time Mr. George Bush launched “war on terror” which affected Muslim world badly. Muslims were the prey of this war. Countries like Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan became the pivot of American forces. Sadly, Afghanistan and Iraq also have masses of American troops.

9/11 made Islamophobia more acceptable. Muslims are considered as terrorists and attacks of 9/11 were scrutinized to be done by Muslim extremists such as Al-Qaeda.

ISLAMOPHOBIA AND FRANCE

Recently, a French school teacher Samuel Paty displayed the lampoons of our Holy Prophet (pbuh) upon which a Muslim student Abdullah. He waited for his teacher to come out of his home and he shot him down with an air gun. Abdullah was living there with status of a refugee. After that French policies started to slap down on Muslims. French President said:

Islam in French needs Enlightenment.”

Further, he mentioned that we need to fight Islamist separatism.

He took measures and implemented new policies on Muslims which includes financing of mosques on French territory. Ban can be imposed on anyone visiting mosque.

On the other hand, Turkey which is also a western a country stood in front of France and retorted aggressively following the caricatures.

This is not the first time, such thing has also happened in France before in 2015. When a French magazine “Charlie Hebdo” published the mimics of our Holy Prophet(pbuh). Muslim extremists invaded the offices of Charlie Hebdo and killed 12 persons and injured 11. According to a report the killers were two Muslim brothers belonging to  extremist group Al-Qaeda.

 Charlie Hebdo, a publication that has always quoted controversy with satirical attacks on political and non-secular leaders. It published cartoons of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) in 2012, following which France temporarily closed embassies and schools amid fears of reprisals. Its offices had been bombed in November 2011 after publishing a caricature of Muhammad on its cover.

CONSEQUENCES OF ISLAMOPHOBIA

Islam is criticized by infidels in very tough words through out the world. Muslims are held responsible for incendiary activities because of hatred and prejudices towards Islam. New policies are being implemented on Muslims. French policies started to slap down on Muslims. Muslims are most exposed to hate speech, racism, discrimination, bigotry at work place, educational institutes and mosques are ambushed by fascists. In India Muslims are being killed because they eat meat of cows and cow is a sanctified animal for Hindus. They are whipped and canned when they go to mosques. Kashmir has become a detention center as was Germany during the reign of Hitler for Jews.

Industry of islamophobia is on rise. In the U.S., about one-half of nationally representative samples of Mormons, Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, and Jews agree that in general, most Americans are prejudiced toward Muslim Americans. Specifically, 66% of Jewish Americans and 60% of Muslim Americans say that Americans in general are prejudiced toward Muslim Americans. Muslims(48%) have been through religious discrimination. It is always felt that Muslims will overtake the society and they will spread violence, hatred and bigotry in society. It is in people’s perception that Muslim’s will create problems. Well, it is not their fault up to major extent. It is due to extremist groups like Al-Qaeda which conveys terror in hearts of people. Another aspect is the role of the Media which tries to aggrandize every issue for commercial gain. The recent acts of certain so-called Muslim terrorists in America and other parts of the world added much more fuel to the fire which was already burning and the image of bad or evil which was already used by certain Western governments about Muslims got a stamp of approval for many people who are not aware of the true aspects of Islam.

ISLAMOPHOBIA, A FORM OF RACISM
Most scholars agree that Islamophobia is a form of racism. It is anti-Muslim racism. This type of racism stirs up hatred and prejudices on religious beliefs and ethnic backgrounds. Islam is baselessly labeled as treacherous to western civilization. They feel inferior in front of Islamic values. And they are always trying to prove Islam inferior and themselves, superior.

Islamophobia is illustrated as manifestation of cultural racism. Many people go through discrimination because they are perceived as Muslims. Western identities are created within white racialists.15 March, a gunman walked into the Al Noor mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand and opened fire. During the course of his killing spree there, and at the Linwood Islamic Centre, 51 people were slaughtered in their place of worship for no other reason than their Murderer wanted to decide their faith by himself.  the racists in Northern Ireland who left a pig’s head on the door of the mosque . If this is not racism, then what it is? The motorists demanding £1,000 more to insure their car if their name is Muhammad, then what it is, called religious racism. Then how is it possible for native Muslims of those countries to spend a life of tranquility in those countries, where there not even minor rights of Muslims are protected. Where Muslims face troubles to go to their places of worships. This is not what they call freedom of speech. There is wide variability between freedom of speech and religious racism.

HOW TO ERADICATE ISLAMOPHOBIA?

It should be the first duty of teachers to exterminate such convictions from intellects of the young students and children. Islam is a peace loving religion. Muslims can not harm even an animal without any rationale. Media must also alter the way they present Muslims. Media must show things that are free from any kind of hatred towards religion. Politicians must also acknowledge ways to prevent Islamophobia. It would aid in preventing crimes. Differences in religious beliefs are basis of prejudices. These divergences take place in intellects of young children.

CONCLUSION

Islamophobia is rooted in minds of western people and other non-Muslims. Islamophobia is a slang which deteriorates the tranquility of human mind. Islamophobia is unbearable for Muslims and acts related to it. Such as exhibiting caricatures and lampoons of Holy Prophet Muhammad and then calling it freedom of speech. People are visually impaired to metamorphose among freedom of speech and hate speech. Hate speech, then escorts to ferocity. In retaliation of hate speech Muslim extremists pursuit anarchism. This anarchism ushers to Islamophobia and hence the cycle continues. Western states are chauvinists. Chauvinism has deeply rooted in intellect of people. Despicable oratory bestows people with license to treat Muslims preferentially. Muslims, in many parts of the world are conventionalized as arsonists and terrorists. They consider immigrants as foreign in their lands. Even the natives of those lands are prejudiced as foreigners. Muslim students and teachers are bullied. Together, we can flotsam bigotry and preconception and make world which is full of respect for religions.

REFERENCES

Continue Reading

Religion

Islamophobia: A fungible prop for Muslim religious soft power

Published

on

Think the Muslim world is united in opposing Islamophobia? Think twice.

Rising anti-Muslim sentiment in countries like China, Myanmar, and India as well as the West against the backdrop of increased support for anti-migration and extreme nationalist groups, and far-right populist parties is proving to be a boost for contenders for religious soft power in and leadership of the Muslim world.

For Turkey, Iran and Pakistan, supporters of different expressions of political Islam, Islamophobia provides the backdrop for attempts to position themselves as defenders of Muslim causes such as Palestinian rights in Jerusalem, the third holiest city in Islam, the plight of the Rohingya in Myanmar, and conflict in predominantly Muslim Kashmir.

Absent from the contenders’ list is China’s brutal crackdown on Turkic Muslims in its troubled north-western province of Xinjiang. China, which aggressively has sought repatriation of Turkic Muslims, recently ratified an extradition treaty that Turkey, home to the largest Xinjiang exile community, insists will not put Uighurs at risk.

By the same token, Islamophobia has proven a useful tool to influence efforts by men like French President Emmanuel Macron and Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz to crack down on political Islam and shape the faith in the mould of Turkey & Co’s Middle Eastern rivals for religious soft power, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

The Gulf monarchies advocate a vague notion of ‘moderate’ Islam that preaches absolute obedience to the ruler and is quietist and non-political. The two Gulf states have gone as far as legitimizing China’s crackdown and persuading the 57-nation Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to endorse Chinese policy as an effective way of countering political extremism and violence.

Economics and trade are powerful drivers for the Muslim world’s refusal to hold China accountable. But so are the brownie points that major Muslim-majority contenders for religious soft power garner in Beijing. Muslim criticism of the crackdown potentially could make the difference in pressuring China to change its policy.

Saudi and Emirati rejection of and campaigning against political Islam bolsters the rationale of not only China’s crackdown but also Russian efforts to control Moscow’s potentially restive Muslim minority. China may not like the propagation of political Islam by the Gulf states’ religious soft power rivals but values their silence.

Chinese Turkic Muslims is not the only issue over which contenders, including Asian states like Indonesia, irrespective of what notion of Islam they promote, stumble in their quest for religious soft power.

So is another litmus test of claims of a majority of the contenders to embrace religious tolerance and inter-faith dialogue that raises the question of whether contenders should clean up their own house first to give credibility to their often-opportunistic embrace of ‘moderate’ Islam.

Among the rivals, the UAE, populated in majority by non-nationals, is one of only two contenders to start acknowledging changing attitudes and demographic realities.

Authorities in November lifted the ban on consumption of alcohol and cohabitation among unmarried couples. This week, the UAE opened the door to the naturalization of foreign nationals.

The other contender, Nahdlatul Ulama, the world’s largest Muslim movement, has begun tackling legal and theological reform of Islam with the encouragement of the government. The movement offered in October a platform for then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to lash out at China’s treatment of Turkic Muslims.

By contrast, Pakistan, in an act of overreach modelled on US insistence on extra-territorial abidance by some of its laws, recently laid down a gauntlet in the struggle to define religious freedom by seeking to block and shut down a US-based website associated with Ahmadis on charges of blasphemy.

Ahmadis are a minority sect viewed as heretics by many Muslims that have been targeted in Indonesia and elsewhere but nowhere more so than in Pakistan where they have been constitutionally classified as non-Muslims. Blasphemy is potentially punishable in Pakistan with a death sentence.

The Pakistani effort was launched at a moment that anti-Ahmadi and anti-Shiite sentiment in Pakistan, home to the world’s largest Shia Muslim minority, is on the rise. Recent mass demonstrations denounced Shiites as “blasphemers” and “infidels” and called for their beheading as the number of blasphemy cases being filed against Shiites in the courts mushrooms.

Pakistan’s rivals in the competition for religious soft power have largely remained silent about the worrying trend, raising questions about the integrity of their commitment to religious freedom and tolerance as well as their rejection of Islamophobia.

Newly appointed Indonesian religious affairs minister, Yaqut Cholil Qoumas, a senior Nahdlatul Ulama official, is proving to be the exception that confirms the rule. Mr. Qoumas pledged in one of his first statements as a minister during a visit to a Protestant church to protect the rights of Shiites and Ahmadis.

Said Indonesia scholar Alexander R Arifianto: “Qoumas’ new initiatives as Religious Affairs Minister are a welcome move to counter the influence of radical Islamists and address long-standing injustices against religious minorities. He now has to prove these are not empty slogans, but an earnest attempt at promoting equal citizenship for all Indonesians irrespective of their religious beliefs.”

Continue Reading

Religion

Custodians of Islam, changing their Avatar

Published

on

If we peek into the historical traces, it could be seen that the world has fought more wars on religion or for their state’s dignity and integrity than any other reason. It is mainly because accepting others ideologies either its religious or national, it’s hard to accept and this is at present the prevailing issue if someone looks deeper into the complex picture of geo-politics.

United Arab Emirates has passed new laws that have shocked the entire Muslim world. The Arab World has also been perceived as the “custodians of Islam” and other Muslim countries have look towards for the perfect implementation of misinterpreted “Islamic values”, ignoring the fact that mainly the values followed in the Arab world are Arabic not Islamic. There is huge difference among two interpretations.

UAE has recently relaxed its social constraints. These constraints that served as a shield from adopting the un-Islamic practices and pro-western values. UAE has allowed couples to cohabit; it has allowed drinking without fear of punishment. Lastly it has also it put off the honor crime from its menu means; they have criminalized the act of honor killing. The decision of UAE to revamp its policies depicts that UAE has chosen a “new” avatar, a more pro-western avatar, leaving the Islamic values behind.  The broadening of personal freedoms reflects that UAE is on its new journey to change its society at home.

After the announcement of new laws it seems as if United Arab Emirates is more focus on shifting their oil dependent economy or other industries. This includes inviting the high-flow of Israel and Western investments into their country at the cost of anything. They are aiming to boost UAE is the skyscraper tourist destination for Western tourists and fortune seekers, businesses regardless of its “legal hard-line Islamic System.”

Moreover, the major revamps came particularly right after the historic U.S brokered deal to normalize relations between UAE and Israel. The future will reveal but it can be foreseen that the days of monarchy are coming to end. It won’t happen in few years; it will take time but is surely going to happen. The decades old filthy rich monarchy will be replaced by “Democracy” for sure.

Other than the UAE, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is also on the same journey. The new monarch King Muhammad Bin Salman is also tilted towards “Western culture” and more “Liberalist thoughts and values”. He is also more inclined to bring on more liberal structures in their country, for examples recently Saudi Arabia has given more freedom to women for driving and is allowed to work with men at offices or any other workplaces. These drastic changes were considered as an impossible task to do but things are changing rapidly.

The question to ask is, now where would Pakistan tilt? Whose society would Pakistan look upon as the guardian and custodians of Islam and its Islamic values? The Arab countries have also had massive influence upon the Pakistani society particularly in religious terms. Pakistan has to bear the cost of “Wahabbism” clashing with “Shiaism” and other Islamic sects that were mainly brought by the Arabs into the country.

Many Pakistanis have considered the Arabs as their ideal and the Arabian society as an ideal society to live in. I have also heard people giving examples of “Islamic system of Saudi Arabia” and how loyal they are to the “Islamic values”. They are also perceived as the “Guardians” and “Custodians” of Islamic values. But now as they are inclined or totally moving towards Western system, would Pakistan also opt for liberalism in their country?

As there has always been an environment of confusion in the Pakistani society. This confusion is, wither to opt for democracy or go for an Islamic system. This has created a sharp separation in the Pakistani society, the one struggling to go totally Western (far-left), and the others trying to preserve the Islamic system (far-right).

After United Arab Emirates new laws, this question is becoming more complex. The transformation of United Arab Emirates adoption of Westernized values shows that it is only the Muslim world leaving its values behind and moving towards a borrowed baggage of cultures and values. The future will disclose that who will sit on the throne of “Custodian of Islam”. Till now the changing geo-political situation shows that it is Turkey that is striving to go for this throne.

On the current politics of Arab powers I would say, “A tree’s beauty lies in its branches, but its strength lies in its roots,” rightly said by Matshona Dhliwayo.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

International Law2 hours ago

Why states undermined their sovereignty by signing NPT?

Nuclear weapons are known as brawny and cataclysmic weapons. The source of the energy of such weapons is fission and...

Environment5 hours ago

Duck conservation takes flight in Jamaica

On January 20, 2021, the day of the inauguration of American president Joe Biden, two ducks named “Joe” and “Kamala”...

Finance6 hours ago

Estonia provides good support to jobseekers, but does not reach everybody

The Estonian labour market has outperformed most EU countries after the global financial crisis. The employment rate of people in...

Energy News8 hours ago

New EU energy labels applicable from 1 March 2021

To help EU consumers cut their energy bills and carbon footprint, a brand new version of the widely-recognised EU energy...

Energy News10 hours ago

E-Boda-Bodas: a promising day for electric transportation in East Africa

Forty-nine motorcycles made little noise but raised much interest in Nairobi’s Karura Forest this morning, as the UN Environment Programme...

Americas12 hours ago

Biden’s Syria strikes don’t make him a centrist Democrat – they make him a neocon

Biden’s Syria strikes last week left many of his supporters, including me, surprised. The Syria strikes don’t make Biden the...

Reports12 hours ago

65% of Adults Think Race, Ethnicity or National Origin Affects Job Opportunities

A recent Ipsos-World Economic Forum survey has found that 65% of all adults believe that, in their country, someone’s race,...

Trending