Connect with us

Intelligence

Islam Between Fatwa and Suicide Attack

Uran Botobekov

Published

on

Doctor of Theology Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri

Jihad of the Moderate Islam against Salafi-Jihadist groups

Pakistan seems to take active measures against the ideology of radical Islamism after Donald Trump accused Islamabad of playing a “double game” on fighting terrorism and warned it would have to do more if it wanted to maintain U.S. aid.In mid-January 2018, more than 1,800 Muslim clerics in Pakistan issued fatwa against jihad and suicide bombings.

The text of the legal religious decision specifies that “suicide bombings are ‘haraam’ and violate key Islamic teachings.”“This fatwa provides a strong base for the stability of a moderate Islamic society,” Pakistan President Mamnoon Hussain told at an official ceremony. The fatwa has been developed by 30 clerics, and another 1,829 prominent representatives of the Islamic clerics have supported this position, as AlArabiya has written in its message.

As a scholar analyzing the process of radicalization of the Islamic ideology and the activities of Salafi-Jihadi groups in Central Asia and in the Middle East, I’d like to emphasize that this measure taken by the Pakistani authorities have been approved by many ulamas of moderate Islam in the region. Only Afghanistan’s President Ashraf Ghani criticized the anti-terror fatwa issued by religious scholars in Pakistan, saying the anti-terrorism fatwa should have covered the entire Muslim world, including his country.

It should be noted that prominent theologians, muftis and ulamas of the Islamic world before had issued similar Islamic directive or fatwa against suicide bombings used by terrorist groups. For example, in 2010, a prominent Islamic preacher, Doctor of Theology Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri issued a global fatwa against suicide bombings. In his book, “Fatwa on terrorism and suicide bombings”, issued in English in London, he has organized theological arguments based on ayats of Quran against killings of civilians and against suicide bombings. He set out a point-by-point theological rebuttal of every argument used by al-Qaeda inspired recruiters. At that time Tahir ul-Qadri told that his 600-page judgment, known as a fatwa, completely dismantles al-Qaeda’s violent ideology.Unfortunately, after 8 years, we have to admit that the promises made by Tahirul-Qadri have not been accomplished. His fatwa didn’t destroy the radical ideology of al-Qaeda, which keeps on succeeding in recruiting new supporters throughout the world and using suicide bombings.

In 2014, Saudi Arabia’s senior clerical leadership has issued a new fatwa, or legal ruling, declaring terrorism a “heinous crime” under sharia law to undermine the legitimacy of ISIS insurgents in Iraq and Syria and to discourage support for the extremists.In 2013, Afghan and Egyptian Muslim scholars raised the issue of the release of a fatwa prohibiting suicide bombings, which are actively used by the Taliban militants.In March 2015, Spiritual Directorate of the Muslims of Russia also issued a fatwa against ISIS, which said that the creation of the Caliphate was the haraam without the approval of all the Muslims of the world and approval of the shurah. Russian ulamas have noted that Islam forbids the announcement of the Caliphate without the “shurah” procedure (approval) with all the Muslims of the world. Announcement of the caliphate without approval is deemed a fitnah (revolt). Similar fatwas against the use of suicide bombers by al-Qaeda and ISIS have been issued by Islamic ulamas of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, India and other states.

Yet the efficiency of Islamic directive or fatwa against jihad issued by muftis and ulamas of the Islamic world remains low. Because of their methods of countering the ideology of Islamic radicalism and the ways of fatwa,the explanations given to the people are not sufficient to convince them. Unlike them, the Islamic radicals use social media efficiently and treat various categories of people exactly.

It is naïve to think that if religious scholars issue a fatwa against al-Qaeda and ISIS, the ideology of Islamic radicalism would be delegitimized, while their supporters would lay down arms and would not use suicide bombings.

I have always argued that the ideology of radical Islamism, which allows the use of suicide bombings “against crusaders, Jews and other enemies of Islam”, first of all, must be fought by the Islamic countries, prominent ulamas and recognized muftis that know well the theory and practice of the Islamic religion. However, a burst of the violent ideology of the Islamic radicalism and the active use of suicide bombers in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan last year prove that the Islamic countries and their clergy lose out significantly to transnational groups of al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS in an ideological struggle. The downfall of the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria does not mean that the ideology of the militant Salafism has been prostrated in these countries and suicide bombings have stopped. Vice versa, the activity of the supporters of the Islamic State has increased significantly in social media where they call for jihad against the United States, Russia, Israel and other countries in the West.

It is the call for jihad that is the ideological weapon in the arms of terrorist groups. In the traditional moderate Islam, jihad is not among the five pillars of the faith and is understood as the defensive war against harassment of the Muslims. However, the Islamist radicals try to make jihad as the sixth pillar in the Islamic science, after Shahada (a declaration of faith), Salat (daily worship), Zakat (almsgiving), Siyam (fasting during the Ramadan), and Hajj (the pilgrimage to Makkah).

The Salafis consider jihad mainly as an armed struggle, placing emphasis on the attacking aspect of the holy war. They declare participation in jihad as the sacred duty of every true Muslim. Ideologists of radical Islamism Sayyid Qutb, abd al-Salam Faraj, Ayman al-Zawahiri have developed jihad strategy and tactics for the modern world, emphasizing the methods of using of suicide bombers. In social media, terrorist groups from Central Asia Katibatal Tawhidwal Jihad, the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), Katibatal-Imam Bukhari call the Muslims to join jihad in Sham and defend Islam instead of sitting at home. They claim that only after the overthrow of kafirs and restoration of the unity of all Muslims (ummah), like it was in the golden age of Caliphates, peaceful relations can be established within the ummah.

The Quran as the Source of Truth in the Ideological Struggle

To defend their own positions, both parties – prominent scholarsof moderate Islam and leaders of radical Islamist groups – appeal to the ayats of the Quran and hadiths. In their fatwas, the ulamas and muftis of Pakistan, Russia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, as well as prominent theologian Tahirul-Qadri claim that Islam has nothing to do with terror and the Quran does not allow suicides by means of bombs. As an argument, the authors of fatwas refer to the famous surah 4:29 of the Quran, which reads as follows,“And do not kill yourselves [or one another]. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful.”

However, ideologists of radical Islamism also refer to the Surah Ali ‘Imran [3:169-170] of the Quran for the purpose of recruiting new suicide bombers and inspiring them to the acts of violence and terror:”And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, receiving provision, rejoicing in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His bounty, and they receive good tidings about those [to be martyred] after them who have not yet joined them – that there will be no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve.”

The leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has become the leading theoretician of suicide terrorism by rhetorically blurring the line between suicide and martyrdom. In essays such as “Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Killing of Innocents,” among others, Zawahiri differentiates the two on the basis of intention: Ending one’s life “out of depression and despair” is suicide, but ending one’s life “to service Islam” is martyrdom. Zawahiri told that “the death of a martyr is not the end of the jihad, but rather a clarion call to the witnesses of truth. Martyrdom has come to pour fuel on the fire of rage blazing in the hearts of his troops against the Crusaders.”He goes on to state that anyone who joins the UN is not a true Muslim, calling them Henchmen of the Crusaders.

Zawahiri calls the governments of Muslim states the betrayers of Islam. To intensify his thoughts, he refers to ayat 60:4 of the Quran, in which Allah via his Messenger, Muhammad, summarizes the Muslim-Infidel relation as plainly exampled by Abraham, when he states: “We disown you and that which you worship besides Allah.  We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us–till you believe in Allah alone.”

The Foggy Future of Fatwa

Thus, as the analysis has shown, the efficiency of fatwas against suicide bombings issued by prominent religious scholars and Islamic clergy of Pakistan, Russia, India, and some Central Asian states remains low. To speak simply, the impact of fatwas on terrorist groups of al-Qaeda, ISIS and their branches in Central Asia, Katibat al Tawhid wal Jihad, the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), Katibat al-Imam Bukhari remains very low. The Islamic extremist groups do not consider the authors of fatwas as prominent authorities in sharia law.

Moreover, they think that these fatwas have been issued by order of the governments of Islamic countries, which they consider Irtidad, i.e. renegades of Islam.According to Islam, apostasy is punished by death.Sahih al-Bukhari [52:260]: “…The Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’”Therefore, terrorist groups of al-Qaeda, ISIS and Taliban do not recognize and do not accept the fatwas against suicide bombings issued by the spiritual leaders of moderate Islam. Radical Islamist groups have their own advices on religious affairs and they follow their own commandments. This is another sign that confirms that radical Islam does not accept the principles of modern society and the democratic legal order.

In my opinion, the fatwas against suicide bombings used by terrorist organizations have a positive impact on the struggle against the ideology of Islamic radicalism for several reasons. First, the positive aspect of fatwas issued is their impact on public perception. Despite the fact that they cannot strike a devastating blow to the ideology of terrorist groups, this initiative of Pakistani religious scholars can in some way prevent the recruitment of new jihadists.

Second, fatwas contribute in some way to the public debates among the leaders of traditional moderate Islam and violent jihadists, which can lead to the revision of contradictory interpretations of some important elements of the Islamic science.

Third, after the issue of such fatwas, the Islamic world gradually comes to understand that the Muslim community of the world plays the decisive and defining role in the struggle against the ideology of radical Islamism and destruction of jihadist groups. Responsibility for the destruction of Islamist terrorist groups and jihadist ideology lies on the shoulders of the governments of Islamic states.

We can say quite literally that current Islamic civilization goes through a critical and crucial point in its history and the fate of this civilization directly depends on its ability to cope with radical ideology of the ISIS, al-Qaeda and other jihadist groups.

Continue Reading
Comments

Intelligence

Why America’s Torture-Chief Now Runs the CIA

Eric Zuesse

Published

on

On May 17th, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee voted 10 to 5 to approve Gina Haspel as America’s new chief of the Cenral Intelligence Agency. Back in 2002, she had headed the CIA’s “black site” in Thailand where she ordered and oversaw the torturing of Abu Zubaydah, trying to force him to provide evidence that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks, but Zubaydah had no such evidence and wasn’t even able credibly to concoct a story that President George W. Bush could use to ‘justify’ America’s invading Iraq in response to 9/11. Subsequently, Zubaydah has been held incommunicado in Guantanamo in order to prevent him from being able to be heard by the American public regarding what ‘our’ Government did to him (and possibly even in order to bring formal charges against the U.S. Government regarding its treatment of him), and (to the extent that he knows) why the U.S. Government did this. Even to the present day, the U.S. regime still has not brought any legal charges against Zubaydah, because it possesses no evidence that he was connected to the 9/11 attacks and hasn’t succeeded in fabricating such, but especially because it insists upon refusing to provide him a day in court in which the American public (and the world-at-large) might be able to hear the incriminating further evidence against itself, from him.

Haspel’s confirmation as Trump’s CIA Director is also confirmation that everything which candidate Trump had said on the campaign trail against America’s having invaded Iraq was lies from him, and that he is actually fully on board not only about that invasion, but about the continuing lies about it — and the cover-ups (which are, quite evidently, still ongoing).

If the U.S. regime is allowed to get away with this, then any pontifications from it about such things as “America is under attack” from Russia, and that there has been ”Russian election interference” involved in “this attack on the United States,” is preposterous, but is even worse than that: it is based on flagrant lies by, and on behalf of, a U.S. regime that tortures in order to obtain ‘evidence’ for its invasions, and that hides, for decades, the truth about this, from its own public.

A writer for the Brookings Institution and the Washington Post asserts that America’s Democratic Party’s “haste to brand President Trump a tool [of Russia]” is “unwittingly doing the Russians’ work for them: validating the notion that our democracy is a sham.” But perhaps the prominent publication, and think-tank promotion, of such writers as that, in the United States, is, itself, yet further evidence that “our democracy is a sham.” Only one scientific study has ever been published about whether America’s “democracy” is authentic or else a sham, and it found that this ‘democracy’ certainly is a sham, but the Washington Post and the Brookings Institution etc., don’t publish that information — they hide it, and you’ll see and hear about it only at ‘fake news’ sites such as this. (The real fake-news sites, in the English language, include all of the mainstream ‘news’media and almost all of the ‘alternative news’ ones — but not this site, which is one of the few that are in English and not fake ‘news’.)

The making-Director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, was a bipartisan action by this regime, this fake ‘democracy’, by two fascist political Parties; and, yet, the American public see and hear, in this nation’s leading ’news’ media, such drivel — accusations that Russia is doing, what the U.S. has actually been doing, for decades.

However, this isn’t to say that Russia has actually been doing these things, but only that the U.S. has definitely been doing it — and is set to continue doing it in the future.

Measuring American ‘democracy’ by how uniformly the U.S. Government carries out its “Cold War” against Russia — a ‘Cold War’ that never really was about communism at all but only pretended to be — isn’t just fraudulent, but it is downright stupid, and it seems now to be the established norm, in the United States. A dictatorship can fool its public like that; and, if it doesn’t, it won’t continue to rule.

So, in America and its satellites, Gina Haspel is a ‘patriot’ who wins a top post of power, while Julian Assange is not only an ‘enemy of America’ but one whom the U.S. and its satellites have silenced and are slowly killing. On 14 December 2011, the Washiington Post bannered, “Poll: Americans say WikiLeaks harmed public interest; most want Assange arrested”, and reported that “68 percent say the WikiLeaks’ exposure of government documents about the State Department and U.S. diplomacy harms the public interest. Nearly as many — 59 percent — say the U.S. government should arrest Assange and charge him with a crime for releasing the diplomatic cables.” The American people have been fooled to favor the regime in this, just as they were fooled in 2003,during the lead-up to the regime’s invasion of Iraq.

The reason why America’s torture-chief now runs the CIA, is that this is the way a dictatorship has to act in order to stay in power. And they need a gullible public, in order to be able to continue scamming the public, from one invasion to the next. That’s the unvarnished, and empirically proven, nauseating, truth. Gina Haspel and her promoters hide it from the public, but they can’t reverse it; and they are, in fact, dependent upon its continuation.

Continue Reading

Intelligence

The secret dream of all propagandists

Dr. Andrea Galli

Published

on

Not even a month after Mark Zuckerberg’s grilling at the US House of Representatives, Facebook is announcing a partnership with NATO’s social media propaganda organization: The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab). The organization claims to be the guarantor in defending the public from fake news. In its arsenal of topics to be defended, there are, of course, the usual favorite arguments of NATO. Above all, there is a strong predilection to influence the public perception about governments opposing NATO’s great design and hegemonic ambitions: such as Russia, Iran, Syria, China, Palestine…

The press release of the organizations says: “Today DFRLab announced that we are partnering with Facebook to expand our #ElectionWatch program to identify, expose, and explain disinformation during elections around the world. The effort is part of a broader initiative to provide independent and credible research about the role of social media in elections, as well as democracy more generally”.

For the uninitiated, the DFRLab serves the American-led alliance’s chief advocacy group known as the Atlantic Council. Its methods are rather simple: it grants generous stipends and fantastic academic qualifications to various activists that align with NATO’s agenda. Just look at who funds the Atlantic Council: donors include military contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon, all of whom directly profit from tensions with Russia, China, Syria… Meanwhile, in addition to NATO itself, there are also payments made by the US State Department, along with payments from the US Defense Department. Other major paymasters include the government of the United Arab Emirates, which is, of course, an absolute monarchy and other absolute monarchies in the region.

Facebook has partnered an organization funded by weapons manufacturers, the US military, and Middle-Eastern monarchies to safeguard the democratic process?  If Facebook truly wanted to “protect democracy and elections worldwide,” it would build a broad coalition of experts from a wide and disparate range of the countries it serves. Instead, it has outsourced the task to NATO’s propaganda wing.

This is a perfect situation for NATO and those who depend on it for their source of revenues and status. Because the NATO is now positioned to be the master of the Facebook servility in the information war on the social network battlefield. By marry a clearly biased actor to police “misinformation and foreign interference” and to “help educate citizens as well as civil society,” Mark Zuckerberg’s team has essentially made their company a tool of the US’s military agenda.

This is the dream of every propagandist: to infiltrate in an communication infrastructure present on every smartphone and home computer and used with addiction by the great majority of the population; to channel disinformations to the addicted public and to control “the truth”. The goal is always the same: to obtain popular support for financing the military apparatus and in the end, obtain popular support for a war. We wonder what this dream of propagandists has to do with the defense of democracy. It would come as no surprise that Facebook will be soon proclaimed a defender of freedom and human rights.

Continue Reading

Intelligence

Pathology of a soft war with Iran in cyberspace

Sajad Abedi

Published

on

The soft -war against Iran is a fact that all the scholars acknowledge. In fact, the main and hidden purpose of the soft -war is to disrupt the information system of the countries and to influence the public opinion of the countries. Cybercrime is today in the cyberspace community. With this regard, what is the position of cyber space in this media and cyber campaign?

The soft -war is a kind of conflict between countries, which is dominated by content, programs and software, mainly from the media. In fact, any confrontation between countries or groups those are rival or hostile to each other, in which media, cyber and software tools are used is regarded as a “soft- war” in the world. In the soft- war space, the subject of rockets, guns, tanks, ships and aircraft is not the subject of satellite, Internet, newspapers, news agencies, books, movies, and cinema. Naturally, the soldiers involved in this soft -war are no longer generals, officers and military, but journalists, cinemas, artists and media actors.

Naturally, satellite TVs and radio programs within the framework of the soft -war debate are the continuation of the domination of the capitalist system and seek to secure their own interests and interests in other countries. The main purpose of these types of networks is to influence the public opinion of their target countries and to disrupt the internal information system of the countries concerned. They use several technological tools to reach their predetermined plans, goals, and scenarios. These goals can be faced with various shapes and shapes.

Soft -War has existed throughout history. Even when technological tools such as radio, television, and satellite were not available, there was a soft- war in the context of the war of thought and psychological warfare. But what’s happening now in the world is that hardware or hard-core wars have multiple implications for the invading countries. Therefore, they are trying to achieve their goals by adopting a soft war strategy alongside their hard wars either independently and only within the framework of soft- war. As time goes by, with the growth of technology and media techniques, the working methods of these networks become more complex. Naturally, the layers of the soft -war become more complex, more complete, and the recognition of these tricks becomes even harder.

In his book Soft Power, Joseph Nye introduces elements as soft power pillars, some of which are music and art. That’s also the basis of the soft warfare. In fact, music, art, university, sports, tourism, ancient artifacts, culture and lifestyle of a nation are soft power.

On this basis, there are weaknesses and weaknesses in the internal dimension. One of the most important problems and weaknesses is the inability to use all of its software capabilities in cyber warfare and public diplomacy. In the soft -war of the other faction, the group, the person, the group, the cult, and so on, does not matter. Soft- war does not know the border. Accordingly, all internal groups in this field must be activated in accordance with the guidelines of the Supreme Leader, we must have in the internal arena and in all cultural fields and “infrastructure elements” the soft- war of maximum absorption and minimal elimination, that is, from all the capacities of the system for Cultural confrontation with hostile countries.

The most basic element of soft power is the people. Social capital, public trust, public participation, public culture, public education, and finally all the things that exist in people, localism, nativeism, subcultures, and traditional cultures come from people. In fact, this is something that should be given the most concentration and attention. Using the capacity of the people to cope with these external pressures will have the greatest success.

But how should these capacities, potentials and capital of people is used? The first is used in the media. The national identity in the world is characterized by the national image, that is, the look, the imagination and the imagination that a nation makes for itself. What image do you have in your mind when you hear German or German people? When do you hear the image of the people of Afghanistan, China, Japan, or Arab countries? This is an image that is powerful in the world and talks. Inside Iran, there was a weakness in drawing this image. To create a good image of Iran, one should use the simplest tools, including practical suggestions that media like Voice and Television Organization are capable of demonstrating to the ordinary people of the community. When a tourist arrives for the first time in the country, he is surprised at the first step in entering the airport. Because he faces scenes he did not expect or in the sense of another image of Iran.

In fact, we are now in a soft- war space. Satellite, radio and television tools, along with cyber-tools, have created a full-blown war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. With the growth of technology and media techniques, the working methods of media networks become more complicated, and more complicated, more complete, and harder to know than the soft warfare. Today, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a good news country, but the country is not news. That is, all countries of the world receive Iran-related news on most issues and topics from countries other than us about the country. Once it has come to an end, as we resolve many of the problems in the framework of Article 44, policymakers will take steps to improve media and cyber media activities.

The following strategies can be put forward to combat soft war against Iran in cyberspace and media:

First, the establishment of the National Center for the Coordination of Soft- War is indispensable. This center is responsible for coordinating the various internal institutions in the field of countering the enemy’s soft- war and controlling, monitoring and monitoring media imaging from Iran.

Second, the launch of new media networks under the overall supervision of the audio and video, and with the production and management of the private sector is essential. These networks can informally meet the needs of people’s entertainment and information and restore the people’s confidence in the domestic media.

Third, support for the production of healthy content in cyberspace, especially native social networks, should be supported in order to defend the national interests of the country within the framework of the software movement.

Fourth, attention to the basics of soft power in the country is necessary for maximum absorption and minimal elimination. No artist should be defeated on the pretext of political orientation, the destruction of art and music and national honors, and bringing national issues into line with internal political challenges, will undermine Iran’s soft power.

Continue Reading

Latest

Newsletter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy