-
Q&A: What is to be Expected from the Negotiations Regarding the Genocide in Gaza?
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
What is to be Expected from the Negotiations Regarding the Genocide in Gaza?
(Translated)Question:
It has been more than ten months since the Jews’ aggression on Gaza, and their massacres continue in a witnessed war of genocide, while negotiations are being held and agreements are being concluded to stop it, and they reject them, even refusing to abandon the Salah al-Din axis (Philadelphi Corridor), which Egypt considers a red line, as Al-Arabiya reported on September 3, 2024.
The Biden administration is sponsoring these massacres as it is sponsoring these negotiations, promoting the idea that a solution comes through negotiations at the time the massacres persist! What is expected from these negotiations regarding the genocide? What is America’s role in supporting this aggression? Is America serious about its announced two-state solution? How can this aggression be stopped and Palestine be fully restored to its people as it was? Apologies for the lengthy question.
Answer:
To clarify the answers to the above questions, we will review the following points:
First: The negotiations regarding the genocide and their outcomes, and America’s role in them:
1- In our Question and Answer issued on 22 March 2024, we noted, “Its war was a war of genocide in the truest sense of the word. It was encouraged to do so by the support of the West, both the American and European sides, and their followers. Western leaders flocked to visit the entity to express absolute support for the Jewish entity in the war of genocide it is waging on Gaza. It was also encouraged by the silence of the regimes in the Arab and Islamic countries. Instead of mobilizing the armies to support the people of Gaza, some of them condemned the mujahideen attack and continued their relations with the Jewish entity as if nothing had happened, and the normalizing countries, old and new, continued their normalization with the enemy, and did not sever ties and abandon the normalization betrayal. They did not cancel the treaties and agreements with the Jewish entity, such as Camp David with the Egyptian regime, Wadi Araba with the Jordanian regime, and others. That is, they did not ensure even the minimum state of war.”
Thus, Netanyahu dared to commit further atrocities. On 1 April, 2024, he launched an airstrike on the consulate building in the Iranian embassy complex in Damascus. Not stopping there, the Jewish entity sought to humiliate Iran and its allies further. On the evening of 30th July, it conducted an airstrike in Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, targeting a senior Hezbollah leader, Fuad Shukr. The following day, on July 31st, the Jewish entity carried out an assassination operation in the heart of Iran’s capital Tehran, targeting Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. This happened without being met with a violent reaction that made the Jewish entity forget the whispers of Satan!
2- America then began to launch initiatives and its officials undertook visits to prevent rulers in Muslim countries, especially those neighboring Palestine, from mobilizing their armies to the nusrah (support) of Gaza. This was to facilitate the continuation of massacres committed by the Jewish entity against the people of Palestine. For instance, President Biden’s futile initiative on 31 May 2024, and the U.S. sponsored UN Security Council resolution on 10 June, 2024. America gathered parties for negotiations, adjustments, and changes in trips coming and going, only to distract the Ruwaibidah (incompetent negligent) rulers in Muslim countries from the nusrah of Gaza, under the pretext of avoiding an expansion of the war, whilst the massacres continued before their eyes. Simultaneously, the U.S. continued to support the aggression of the Jewish entity unequivocally, justifying its massacres and providing it with all types of weapons, both previously and subsequently. On 13 August 2024, the U.S. announced its approval of a lethal arms deal worth approximately $20 billion. The Prime Minister of the Jewish entity, Netanyahu, perceived this as a victory, considering it an absolute endorsement of his rigid stance and believing that the U.S. would not halt its support or arms shipments.
3- This indeed happened: President Biden sent his Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, on a ninth tour since the beginning of the Jewish aggression against Gaza. Blinken visited Egypt and, the following day, 19 August, 2024, met with Jewish Prime Minister Netanyahu. He deceitfully claimed on 20 August 2024 in his remarks to the press in Doha, Qatar, (“one of them is very clear that the United States does not accept any long-term occupation of Gaza by ‘Israel’.” It is a vague statement with no clear definition of what constitutes a “long term.” Blinken continued with his deception, stating, “‘Israel’ has now accepted that proposal – I heard that directly from Prime Minister Netanyahu yesterday – and we hope and expect that Hamas will do the same. So, that’s a process that’s ongoing at the same time… We’re engaged every single day with Israel, and our Qatari and Egyptian partners are engaged with Hamas, and over the coming days we are going to do everything possible to, one, get Hamas on board with the bridging proposal.” (whitehouse.gov; Reuters, 19/08/2024)) The New York Times reported on 20 August 2024, citing officials familiar with the negotiations, that the new American proposal allows the ‘Israeli’ forces to continue patrolling part of the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border.
4- The White House reported that President Biden had a phone call with Netanyahu on the evening of 21 August, 2024. (During the call, “President Biden spoke today with Prime Minister Netanyahu of ‘Israel.’ The President and the Prime Minister discussed active and ongoing U.S. efforts to support ‘Israel’s’ defense against all threats from Iran, including its proxy terrorist groups Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis, to include ongoing defensive U.S. military deployments. The President stressed the urgency of bringing the ceasefire and hostage release deal to closure and discussed upcoming talks in Cairo to remove any remaining obstacles.” (whitehouse.gov; Monte Carlo 22/08/2024)). An American official indicated before the call that Biden was expected to pressure Netanyahu to ease the new demand for retaining Jewish forces in the Philadelphi Corridor on the Egypt-Gaza border. Netanyahu refuses to withdraw from this corridor, also known as the Salah al-Din Corridor, which is about 14 kilometers long and approximately 100 meters wide in some sections. It stretches along Gaza’s border with Egypt, which views the Jewish control of the corridor as a violation of the infamous Camp David Accords between the two countries, brokered by the U.S. in 1979. Egypt has called for the Jewish entity to withdraw from the corridor, which it occupied this past May. This position by America made its spoiled child, Netanyahu, realize that America is maneuvering in words without actions. Otherwise, the United States has enormous influence over the Jewish entity, as this entity depends on American economic and military aid and equipment. If it were serious in pressuring it, the Jewish entity would respond without action.
5- Negotiations began in Cairo on 24 August 2024, attended by CIA Director William Burns, the Prime Minister of Qatar, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, the Qatari Foreign Minister, and a delegation from the Jewish entity alongside the host Egyptian delegation with a Hamas delegation present but without direct participation. The official delegations left Cairo on 25 August 2024, without any agreement due to Netanyahu’s obstinacy and his refusal to withdraw from the Salah al-Din Corridor. An Anadolu Agency report on 25 August 25, 2024, quoted a high-ranking Hamas official, who preferred to remain anonymous, stating: “Hamas is committed to the ceasefire proposal announced by President Biden and endorsed by the UN Security Council,” and confirmed “Hamas’s readiness to implement the issues agreed upon on 2 July.” However, Netanyahu is delaying any agreement until he sees the results of the upcoming U.S. presidential election. He is in communication with the Republican counterpart, who are outdoing the Biden administration and Democrats in their unwavering support for Netanyahu and the Jewish entity. Netanyahu met with Trump on 26 July 2024, during Trump’s visit to Washington, receiving full support from him and the Republicans in Congress. Trump and his supporters applauded Netanyahu’s 53-minute speech, with Netanyahu betting on Trump’s return to the presidency, who promised full support and had abandoned the two-state solution. Trump is expected to instruct the Saudi regime to normalize relations with the Jewish entity, prompting other regimes to follow suit. Consequently, Netanyahu is likely to continue his bets until the results of the U.S. elections are known.
6- Netanyahu’s delay and rigidity in his demands until the outcome of the U.S. elections are confirmed. They are underscored by his statements at a televised press conference, as reported by Al-Arabiya on 3 September 2024. Netanyahu declared four goals “to destroy Hamas, to bring back all of our hostages, to ensure that Gaza will no longer present a threat to ‘Israel,’ and to safely return the residents of the northern border.” He added that, “three of those war goals go through one place: the Philadelphi Corridor.” He indicated that the corridor is “Hamas’s pipeline for oxygen and rearmament,” and continued, that’s why the ‘Israelis’ “must control it.”
Secondly: Is America serious about the two-state solution?
1- America’s proposed two-state solution, which it has promoted by gathering its allies among the rulers of Muslims, is nothing more than a deceitful manipulation of terms. It does not offer a real state for the Palestinian people. Instead it is more akin to autonomous governance or something even less. US President Joe Biden stated in remarks to journalists – last Friday – that there are various models for a two-state solution, pointing out that several countries in the United Nations do not have their own armed forces. (Al Jazeera, 4 January 2024). This implies that Biden is referring to a model of statehood without armed forces! As for an actual sovereign state as recognized for other countries, the Jewish entity rejects it. On 18 July 2024, Al Jazeera reported that the ‘Israeli’ Knesset adopted a decision rejecting the establishment of a Palestinian state for the first time in the assembly’s history. They are aware that the U.S. will not abandon them, as the Jewish entity is a creation of the U.S. and serves as its forward military base in the heart of the Muslim world to combat Islam and Muslims. US President Biden personally sympathizes with them, considering himself a Zionist with religious beliefs driving him to defend the Jewish entity. Moreover, his Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, a significant figure in the administration, has openly stated that he defends the Jewish entity due to his Jewish identity before his role as Secretary of State. Even Vice President Kamala Harris, a presidential candidate, introduced her husband as Jewish in a meeting with Jewish leaders, to demonstrate the extent of the administration’s support for the Jewish entity and the Jewish community. She is expected to continue this policy of support if she assumes office. If Trump succeeds, he will compete with the Democrats in his support for the Jews and the Jewish entity. Consequently, the Jewish entity relies on this extensive support and persists in its transgressions and crimes.
2- Another important aspect that needs clarification regarding the two-state solution is the following:
a- It is an established fact that Palestine is a blessed land, an Islamic land, the land of Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa which Allah blessed. Allah (swt) said,
[سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَى بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلاً مِنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى الَّذِي بَارَكْنَا حَوْلَهُ]
“Glory be to Him who took His servant by night from Al-Masjid Al-Haram to Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, whose surroundings We have blessed.” [TMQ Surah Al-Israa 17-1]. The two-state solution called for by those rulers is a betrayal of Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and the believers. The land of Islam does not accept division between its people and its enemies. It is not acceptable for the Jews to have any authority in it, and the two-state solution has no place. Instead, just as Umar Al-Faruq (ra) conquered it, the Khulafa’a Rashidoon (rightly guided caliphs) safeguarded it, Salahudin liberated it, and Abdul Hamid II protected it from the Jews, so it will return through the efforts of Allah’s sincere soldiers.
b- This is the Islamic ruling (Hukm Shari’) on the two-state solution. Thus, even if this solution means giving the Palestinians an independent state in part of Palestine on the 1967 borders, which is about 20% of Palestine, and giving up 80% of it, it is, as we said, a major sin and a betrayal of Allah (swt), His Messenger (saw), and the believers. So how about when what is being offered is nominal self-rule, or less?! It is a betrayal beyond betrayal. It is a major crime, for which its perpetrator will be disgraced, humiliated, and dishonored in this world and severely punished in the Hereafter… Allah (swt) said,
[سَيُصِيبُ الَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا صَغَارٌ عِنْدَ اللهِ وَعَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَمْكُرُونَ]
“Those who have committed crimes will be afflicted with humiliation in the sight of Allah and a severe punishment for what they used to plot.” [TMQ Surah Al-An’am 6:124].
Third: How can this aggression be ended and Palestine be fully restored to its people?
1- This is a clear matter in Islam. If the kuffar attack any Muslim country, occupy it, and expel its people from it, then it is obligatory to fight the enemy and eliminate him with a fierce fight that displaces those behind him, and returns the country to its people as a complete Islamic country, without any deficiency. Allah (swt) says,
[وَاقْتُلُوهُمْ حَيْثُ ثَقِفْتُمُوهُمْ وَأَخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ حَيْثُ أَخْرَجُوكُمْ]
“Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah 2:191], and He (swt) says,
[فَإِمَّا تَثْقَفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْحَرْبِ فَشَرِّدْ بِهِمْ مَنْ خَلْفَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَذَّكَّرُون]
“If you ever encounter them in battle, make a fearsome example of them, so perhaps those who would follow them may be deterred.” [TMQ Surah Al-Anfal 8:57]. Instead, even if an attack is made on any Muslim country without occupying it, the aggression must be repelled,
[فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ وَاتَّقُوا اللهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللهَ مَعَ الْمُتَّقِينَ]
“So, if anyone attacks you, retaliate in the same manner. But be mindful of Allah, and know that Allah is with those mindful of Him.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah 2:194]. So returning the occupied Muslim land and repelling the aggression, all of that is not disputed by two rational people, as it is clearly explained in the Book of Allah (swt) the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw) and the Unanimous Consensus (Ijamaa) of his Companions (ra). Then the Jewish entity will not be able to stand on its own. It is not capable of fighting, except with a rope from the people, as Allah (swt) Al-Qawwi, Al-Aziz said,
[ضُرِبَتْ عَلَيْهِمُ الذِّلَّةُ أَيْنَ مَا ثُقِفُوا إِلَّا بِحَبْل مِنَ اللهِ وَحَبْلٍ مِنَ النَّاس]
“They will be stricken with disgrace wherever they go, unless they are protected by a rope with Allah or a rope from the people.” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran 3:112]. The Jews have cut off the rope of Allah (swt), and what remains for them is the rope of the people from America and Europe, and their agents from the traitors of the rulers in the lands of the Muslims, who do not move a finger in the face of the brutal aggression of the Jews. Indeed, the best of them is the one who stops counting the martyrs and the wounded!
2- The Jewish entity is not a people of fighting and victory. They are as Allah (swt) said,
[لَنْ يَضُرُّوكُمْ إِلَّا أَذًى وَإِنْ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ يُوَلُّوكُمُ الْأَدْبَارَ ثُمَّ لَا يُنْصَرُونَ]
“They can never inflict harm on you, except a little annoyance. But if they meet you in battle, they will flee and they will have no helpers.” [TMQ Surah Aali Imran 3:111]. As you can see, believing youths are fighting them with fewer numbers and equipment than the Jewish entity. Yet this entity has not achieved victory until today. So how would it be if the Muslim armies moved, and not even all the Muslim armies, but only those surrounding Palestine, or even part of them, then the Jewish entity will become a thing of the past. However the problem is in the countries existing in the Muslim lands these days, as their rulers are loyal to the infidel (kufr) colonizers, the enemies of Islam and Muslims. They see and hear the Jewish occupation of Palestine and their brutal crimes and various massacres. Yet it is as if they do not see or hear. Allah (swt) said,
[صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَرْجِعُونَ]
“They are willfully deaf, dumb, and blind, so they will never return to the Right Path.” [TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah 2:18]. The Muslims’ calamity lies in their rulers. The rulers of Muslims have prevented the armies from giving victory (nusrah) to their brothers and sisters in Gaza until today. The number of martyrs has reached about 41,000 and the wounded have reached about 95,000. Yet the rulers are watching what is happening, and the best of them is in the way of those who count the martyrs under the name of the dead. Then they count the wounded as if they were a neutral party, or even closer to the Jews!
Fourthly: I conclude with two points as a reminder for those who have a heart or who listen attentively:
1- We said in the Question and Answer dated 22 March 2024, “It is known that the British Foreign Minister’s Balfour Declaration, which was included in his letter dated November 2, 1917 to Lord Rothschild, included the British government’s support for the establishment of a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine. This promise was in the last days of the defeat of the Ottoman Caliphate (Uthmani Khilafah) in World War I due to treason by some Arab and Turkish men… Years prior, Herzl, the representative of the Zionist Societies supported by Britain, had submitted a request on May 18, 1901 to the Ottoman Caliph, trying at that time to exploit the financial crisis that the Ottoman Caliphate was suffering from by offering huge sums of money to fill the Khilafah’s deficit in exchange for granting them land in Palestine, but the answer of Caliph Abdul Hamid in response to Herzl was a strong and wise answer: “I cannot give up a single inch of the land of Palestine, for it is not my property, but rather the property of the Islamic Ummah. My people fought for this land and watered it with their blood. Let the Jews keep their millions, and if the Khilafah (Caliphate) is torn apart one day, then they can take Palestine without a price, but while I am alive, that will not happen…” The Caliph had vision, insight, and foresight. He was sincere in his outlook. After the demolition of the Khilafah (Caliphate), Palestine was given to the Jews for free! Thus began the story of the usurping of Palestine and the displacement and killing of its people, and what Caliph Abd al-Hamid had expected, may Allah have mercy on him, materialized. And so the abolition of the Caliphate (1342 AH – 1924 CE) took place, which was led by the West, led by Britain at the time, with traitors from the Arabs and Turks. This abolition was the actual introduction to the creation of the monstrous Jewish entity in Palestine.”
2- Today, with the agent rulers in Muslim countries marching behind the kuffar colonialists and with their betrayal of Palestine, the land of Islam, the land of Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, whose surroundings Allah (swt) has blessed… these lowly Ruwaibadah ones will disappear, and the Islamic state, the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly-Guided Caliphate), will return, Allah willing, and fighting the Jews and eradicating their occupation will happen, Allah willing, as Muhammad (saw), as-Sadiq al-Ameen (the truthful, the trusted one), said in Musnad Ahmad on the authority of Hudhayfah, «ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّة»“…then there will be a Khilafah (Caliphate) on the method of the Prophethood” Al-Bukhari narrated on the authority of Abdullah bin Umar (ra) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say, «تُقَاتِلُكُمُ الْيَهُودُ فَتُسَلَّطُونَ عَلَيْهِمْ» “The Jews will fight you, and you will prevail over them.” Muslim also narrated it with the wording on the authority of Ibn Umar on the authority of the Prophet (saw) who said, َ«تُقَاتِلُنَّ الْيَهُودَ فَلَتَقْتُلُنَّهُم» “You will certainly fight the Jews and kill them.” Then the earth will shine with the victory of Allah (swt). Allah (swt) said,
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And on that Day the believers will rejoice * In the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum 30:4-5].
1st of Rabii’ al-Awwal 1446 AH
4 September 2024 CE -
Q&A: Border Clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
Border Clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan
(Translated)Question:
Al Arabiya Net published on 13 August 2024, “The Taliban government accused Pakistani forces on Tuesday of killing three civilians, including a woman and two children, during clashes on the border between the two countries. A Pakistani border official in Torkham said that three Pakistani soldiers were injured in the clash…” Prior to this, “the International Monetary Fund signed on Friday an agreement with the Pakistani government to establish a $7 billion aid program over three years.” (Sky News Arabia, 13 July 2024). What is behind these clashes, especially since there have been previous clashes as well? Is there a connection between the aid of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is controlled by the US, and Pakistan being occupied with a conflict with Afghanistan, instead of focusing on India, thus allowing India to concentrate on confronting China, in line with US interests, to pressure China? Or are there other reasons?
Answer:
To address the above questions, we need to examine the following points:
1- In our Question and Answer dated January 28, 2023, regarding the border established by British colonialist rule between Pakistan and Afghanistan, we stated:
“In 1893, an agreement was signed between the then British Foreign Secretary Sir Mortimer Durand and the Afghan ruler, Amir Abdul Rahman Khan, to draw the border line known as the ‘Durand Line,’ stretching 2,640 kilometers from northeast to southwest, between Afghanistan and Pakistan. This border was established as the official boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It divided the Pashtun tribes into two parts on either side of the line. It is worth noting that the border area is predominantly inhabited by Muslims belonging to the Pashtun ethnic group, which constitutes the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan, making up about 40% of the population. Throughout the past two centuries, all Afghan rulers have been from this group. Pashtuns are the second-largest ethnic group in Pakistan after Punjabis…
…Afghanistan has refused to recognize this border, especially since England at that time did not consider the demographic, ethnic, and tribal structure of the area when drawing the Durand Line, which was artificially drawn, on 12 November, 1893, to serve British colonialist interests. The British, like many before them, struggled to control the border areas. Britain suffered a significant military defeat in Afghanistan during its aggression between 1839 and 1842. It launched another aggression in 1878, but withdrew after two years, although it gained political influence through Afghan rulers who signed the Treaty of Gandamak in 1879, which resulted in Afghanistan losing vast territories to British colonialist rule over the Indian Subcontinent.” [End Quote from Question and Answer].
2- The Durand Line border had previously seen its significance diminish during the turbulent periods in Afghanistan, particularly following the major international interventions by the Soviet Union in 1979, and then the US in 2001. However, it has resurfaced as a point of contention, reflecting current US policy interests, following its humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.
It should be noted that the border was relatively porous during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, which facilitated the movement of mujahideen fighters receiving training in Pakistan to combat the Soviets in Afghanistan. This border permeability was consistent with the demographic realities, and familial ties, among Pashtun families on both sides of the border.
Additionally, it aligned with US policy aimed at countering the Soviet presence in Afghanistan.
However, with the US occupation of Afghanistan, American policy shifted, leading to demands for Pakistan to tighten border controls, and prevent the movement of anti-American mujahideen across the border. Consequently, the Pakistani military engaged in fierce battles in the border areas within Pakistan.3- In May 2018, Pakistan incorporated the tribal border areas adjacent to Afghanistan into the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, thereby ending a period of ambiguity and lack of jurisdiction for Pakistani laws, police, and judiciary in those regions. Pakistan considers the border issue with Afghanistan settled, as confirmed recently by interim Prime Minister Anwar ul-Haq Kakar in an interview with the Afghan network Tolo News, where he stated, “The Durand Line is an internationally recognized “border” between Afghanistan and Pakistan… The UN and 206 countries have approved this as an international border, what the Afghan people say about this is their internal discussion, in which I am not interested.” (Tolo News, 6 February 2024).
However, all Afghan governments throughout history, regardless of their political or ideological affiliations, have refused to recognize the Durand Line, as the official international border between the two countries. The most recent statement on this matter came from Mullah Nooruddin Turabi, the Minister for Borders and Tribal Affairs in the Taliban government, who said, “There is no official border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
The dispute over this border, which extends over 2,600 kilometers, has intensified. In our previous Question and Answer dated 28 January, 2023, we mentioned, “Pakistan further tightened controls by imposing a visa requirement on Afghans for the first time in history. This tension was exacerbated by Pakistan constructing a 3-meter high border fence, spending hundreds of millions of dollars on its construction over hundreds of kilometers. All of this was under the pretext of regulating the movement of goods and people and protecting against ‘terrorists.’ The fence became one of the causes of heightened tensions and clashes in the border area between the two countries. The Taliban government prevented Pakistani forces from continuing the construction of the fence along the approximately 2,700-kilometer border after around 90% of it had been completed. The Ashraf Ghani government had agreed to its construction before its fall. The Taliban government confronted Pakistani forces each time they attempted to complete the fence, leading to clashes in various border areas and resulting in casualties on both sides. Thus, tensions between the two countries escalated, especially when Pakistan accused the Taliban government of not preventing the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) from attacking the Pakistani army. Pakistan then carried out airstrikes on sites inside Afghanistan, claiming they were targeting TTP fighters…”
4- Thus, skirmishes and clashes between the Pakistani military and Taliban forces have become a new reality in the relationship between the two countries. These conflicts have intensified due to border issues and attacks between the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the Pakistani army. Last year, the number of casualties rose to its highest level in six years, with over 1,500 people killed, including civilians, security personnel, and militants, according to the Center for Research and Security Studies (Al Jazeera Net, 17 July 2024).
With the Pakistani military accusing Afghanistan of harboring TTP fighters, Islamabad has increased its pressure on Afghanistan. According to Qari Yusuf Ahmadi, spokesperson for the Taliban’s Returnee Assistance and Resettlement Committee, “The neighboring countries – Pakistan and Iran – have forcibly deported over 400,000 refugees since the beginning of 2024, with Pakistan responsible for 75% of these deportations.” (Al Hurra, 11 June 2024).
5- From all this, it becomes clear that the Pakistani government, which is aligned with the US, is actively harassing and provoking the Taliban in Afghanistan. It restricts the free movement of Afghans across the border, demanding visas for visiting relatives, and imposing the border fence as a fait accompli. Moreover, Pakistan is effectively shifting the border line further into Afghan territory, tightening restrictions on Afghan refugees, over 2 million of whom include 600,000 who fled following the US withdrawal in 2021 (Al Hurra, 1 November 2023), and expelling them from Pakistan. In 2022, Pakistan facilitated US aircraft passage to carry out airstrikes within Afghanistan, resulting in the death of Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. Additionally, Pakistani intelligence is conducting targeted assassinations in Afghan border cities, focusing on prominent figures associated with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
6- All of Pakistan’s actions fall within the framework of US policy, aimed at pressuring the Taliban in Afghanistan, until they are fully subdued. This also aligns with Washington’s desire to push the Pakistani military into civil war and conflict with Afghanistan, to facilitate India’s alignment with the US against China. Additionally, it reflects America’s efforts to prevent China from exploiting Afghanistan’s mineral resources. The prolonged animosity between the US and the Taliban, over more than two decades, has heightened China’s hopes of utilizing Afghanistan’s resources for its industries, after the US withdrawal in 2021. The border dispute between Pakistan and Afghanistan obstructs China’s ambitions, given the significant investments it has made in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
This is the broader context of Pakistan’s policy towards Afghanistan, where it becomes evident that the US is the main driver of the conflict between them. This context includes fostering hostility, the armed border dispute, escalating tensions in all areas, and conducting airstrikes by Pakistan within Afghanistan. For instance, the Afghan Defense Minister announced that Pakistani Air Force jets attacked populated areas in Khost and Paktika provinces on the border, resulting in the deaths of innocent women and children. The Pakistani military and government have not commented on the matter. These strikes followed attacks that killed six Pakistani soldiers at a military checkpoint along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, and came after seven soldiers were killed in a recent attack in North Waziristan near the Afghan border. (Asharq Al-Awsat, 18 March 2024).
7- The strained relationship between the two countries since 2021 is trending towards escalation, primarily due to the underlying American interests that continue to drive the situation. These interests are persistent and lead towards increasing tensions, regardless of whether Pakistan takes loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or not. Although the IMF’s formal conditions and loan agreements, covering issues such as domestic currency, exchange rates, trade, energy, and taxes, do not officially include Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan, it is not possible to exclude the influence of America’s insidious policies. Such policies entice Pakistani officials with promised loans, pushing them to intensify efforts to serve American interests, including increasing tensions with Afghanistan.
In the summer of 2023, Pakistan received a $3 billion loan from the IMF, which is dominated by the US, and is now promised additional aid. “The IMF signed an agreement with the Pakistani government on Friday to establish a $7 billion aid program over three years” (Sky News Arabia, 13 July 2024). This additional funding further fuels Pakistan’s commitment to advancing American objectives, including escalating tensions with Afghanistan.
8- Given all of this, the current Pakistani government’s statements, aligned with American interests, have heightened tensions between the two countries. This was evident in the incident in mid-July 2024 where Pakistani soldiers were killed:
a- “The Pakistan will continue to launch attacks against Afghanistan as part of a new military operation aimed at countering terrorism, the country’s defence minister has told the BBC.” (BBC English, 2 July 2024). According to the same source, “The Taliban said the statement was “irresponsible,” warning Pakistan that cross-border attacks would have “consequences”.”
b- Diplomatic Tensions: “The Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Deputy Head of the Afghan Taliban government’s mission on Wednesday and urged the Taliban to take action against armed groups based in Afghanistan, which Islamabad claims carried out an attack on a military base this week.” (Al Jazeera Net, 17 July 2024).
c- “A group of heavily-armed militants stormed the cantonment area in the Bannu district of northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in early hours of Monday before a suicide bomber rammed an explosive-laden vehicle into the perimeter wall of the area, killing eight soldiers… “Pakistan has consistently raised its concerns with interim Afghan Government, asking them to deny persistent use of Afghan soil by the terrorists and take effective action against such elements,” the statement said … The army pointed a finger at the Hafiz Gul Bahadur group of outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), “which operates from Afghanistan and has used Afghan soil to orchestrate acts of terrorism inside Pakistan in the past as well.”” (Anadolu Agency, 16 July 2024).
d- Cross-Border Clashes: Al Arabiya Net reported on 13 August 2024, “The Taliban government accused Pakistani forces on Tuesday of killing three civilians, including a woman and two children, during clashes on the border between the two countries. A Pakistani border official in Torkham stated that three Pakistani soldiers were injured in the clash.”
9- Summary: The border disputes and tensions over Afghan refugees in Pakistan, along with the continuous stream of accusations from Pakistan against the Afghan government for harboring Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) fighters, and claiming that attacks originate from Afghanistan, all contribute to rising tensions between the two sides. This situation creates grounds for skirmishes, border clashes, and Pakistani airstrikes within Afghan border towns, and rural areas. It is likely that this trend has been on a steady increase since 2021, following the Biden administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. The primary driver of this tension is American interests, as we have outlined. The US is pushing for increased tensions to achieve its goals in the region and counter China’s influence.
Although the conditions set by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) do not explicitly address these issues, the US views these loans as incentives for its allies in Pakistan, to further escalate tensions and conflicts with Afghanistan. Amidst the fierce competition between Democrats and Republicans in the US presidential elections, and with Republican candidate Donald Trump criticizing the Biden administration for the humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, the Biden administration might push Pakistan into more intense confrontations with the Taliban, to demonstrate to Americans that Pakistan is handling the Taliban issue on behalf of the US.
Given this context, statements from American agents in Pakistan indicate a clear intent to escalate and threaten, suggesting that intermittent skirmishes could evolve into more significant cross-border battles. However, a full-scale war is unlikely, particularly since the stronger party, Pakistan, does not have territorial demands upon Afghanistan.
10- This is the state of Muslims in the absence of Islamic Shariah rulings that require the dismantling of borders between Muslims, and the unification of their lands under a single Khaleefah. This situation will persist as long as the Ummah, especially its people of power, does not rise in anger for their Lord and their Ummah, and does not work to overthrow these treacherous rulers, who conspire against their people with every setting sun, and carry out these conspiracies with every rising sun, to please the enemies of Allah (swt), such as America amongst others. The affairs of Muslims can only be set right as they were at the beginning: ruling by all that Allah (swt) has revealed under a Khilafah (Caliphate) on the Method of Prophethood, driving away the disbelievers behind them. Allah (swt) says,
[فَإِمَّا تَثْقَفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْحَرْبِ فَشَرِّدْ بِهِمْ مَنْ خَلْفَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَذَّكَّرُونَ]
“If you ever encounter them in battle, make a fearsome example of them, so perhaps those who would follow them may be deterred.” [TMQ Surah Al-Anfal 8:57]. The Khilafah’s constitution must be based on Islam from the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (saw), and the Unanimous Consensus of the Companions (ra) (Ijmaa’ Sahaba) and through Shariah Qiyas, not on man-made constitutions, whether it be the 1964 Constitution from the reign of Mohammad Zahir Shah of Afghanistan, which ended in 1973, and which was taken up by the Taliban, according to the announcement by the Minister of Justice on 28 September 2021 (Al Jazeera and Anadolu 28 September 2021), or any other man-made constitutions in Muslim countries. All of this is contrary to what Allah (swt) has commanded:
[وَأَنِ احْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَنْ يَفْتِنُوكَ عَنْ بَعْضِ مَا أَنْزَلَ اللهُ إِلَيْكَ فَإِنْ تَوَلَّوْا فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللهُ أَنْ يُصِيبَهُمْ بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ]
“And judge between them by all that Allah has revealed, and do not follow their desires. And beware, so they do not lure you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. If they turn away, then know that it is Allah’s Will to repay them for some of their sins.” [TMQ Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:49].
Afghanistan and Pakistan must recognize that they are Muslim countries, such that fighting between them is forbidden. They must deepen the bonds of Islamic brotherhood between them, sever any connections with the colonialist disbelievers, primarily America, and grant Nussrah to Hizb ut Tahrir working to establish the Khilafah (Caliphate). By doing so, Muslims will be honored, and disbelievers will be humiliated. Allah (swt) said,
[وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ * بِنَصْرِ اللهِ يَنْصُرُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ]
“And that Day the believers will rejoice * In the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful.” [TMQ Surah Ar-Rum 30:4-5].
22 Safar Al Khair 1446 AH
27/8/2024 CE -
Sheikh Taqiuddin an-Nabhani – The Hero of Revival
Allah ﷻ said, وَقَالُوا۟ لَوۡ كُنَّا نَسۡمَعُ أَوۡ نَعۡقِلُ مَا كُنَّا فِیۤ أَصۡحَـٰبِ ٱلسَّعِیرِ “And they will say, ‘If only we had been listening or reasoning, we would not be among the companions of the Blaze.””
Intellectual deviation can lead an entire to the most declined situations. This is why reviving the thoughts of the Ummah and correcting its pathway is one of the greatest heroics. The heroic Sheikh, the courageous Shariah judge, the reviver of Islamic thought, Taqiyudeen An-Nabhani, the good son of this Ummah, who was passionate for her revival. He lived a life where he witnessed the chaos caused by the destruction of the Khilafah. He witnessed the permeation of Western culture, and the assault of different ideas and organizations, which corrupt the pure idea of Islam in the minds of the people, such as patriotism, nationalism, freemasonry, Marxism and others. Behind each of these ideologies were a thousand mouthpieces. He was shocked by the Nakba in Palestine, whom he is a son of. He studied many different Islamic programs for change. He could have despaired and isolated himself from the people or taken a pragmatic individualistic Dawah approach, just as many others did. However, he (rh) took a heroic principled stance which is only taken by people of great resolve and intellect.
The Sheikh memorised the Quran at the age of 13, then he studied Arabic and judicature, and attained the highest level in Shariah in Al-Azhar University. He studied deeply the organizations and movements that existed at his time and placed his finger on the error which many of them had: weakness of the Islamic thought and its contamination by Western impurities which invaded the lands. The Sheikh began meeting the different Islamic organizations and their leaderships of his time at Al-Azhar in Egypt as well as in Palestine, where he was a Shariah judge in the Court of Al-Quds, discussing with them and presenting to them the ideas he reached. At the same time, he was debating the secularists, nationalists, socialists and their ilk. He combined in himself fierceness in attacking non-Islamic ideas, with respect and softness when discussing with Islamic bodies, no matter how much he disagreed with them since part of the methodology of Nabhani was to refrain from attacking personalities and bodies which were working for Islam. He was also characterised with being kind to his Ummah and not holding her responsible for the decline like many do unfortunately. He was bursting with intelligence, filled with energy, powerful in reasoning, outstandingly capable of convincing others, unknown to rest, he was clearly active because of the wounds sustained by his Ummah.
After a deep and accurate study, Allah granted Sheikh Taqi success in identifying the source of the disease the Ummah is suffering from the absence of a state which implements the system of Islam thus looking after the people and repelling their enemy. He was also guided to the prophetic method of reviving the Ummah and resuming its Islamic way of life: establishing a party from among the sons of the Ummah, which takes Islam as a political ideology seeking to resume the Islamic way of life via re-establishing the Khilafah Rashidah which was promised by Allah ﷻ and the Messenger ﷺ. The Sheikh began giving Khutbahs and lectures in Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa, in Al-Khaleel and other cities in Palestine, showing the Muslims their duty and attacking the Arab regimes by calling them Western colonialist creations. He used to expose the political plans of the Western states and their plots against Islam and the Muslims. He met the Ulema whom he knew and offered them to join him in his work, until he managed to convince a group of distinguished Ulema and notable judges. He crowned his political activism by founding Hizb-ut-Tahrir in the year 1953 despite them all knowing the risks of what they were about to embark on.
The Hizb began its Dawah in Al-Quds and the surrounding areas. The authorities realised the danger posed by this Dawah, so they swiftly moved to attack the Hizb, ban it, shut down its offices and arrest its members. The Jordanian and Palestinian authorities strangled the Hizb. However, Alhamdulillah, this coincided with the spreading of the idea of Khilafah across the country. In fact, its light illuminated across borders. The Sheikh did not call to Khilafah as a mere slogan. He rather managed to produce Shariah details for what is before and after establishment of the Khilafah. He modelled the Shariah prophetic method for establishing the Khilafah State. He also defined the Dawah structure necessary for organizing the journey of the Party working to establish this State in a manner that protects it from deviation and derailing. He (rh) went on to produce detailed Ijtihadi material for all systems within the Khilafah State in ruling, economics and others.
Then he presented to the Ummah, the highest intellectual output which no organisation had done before him: a complete constitution for the Khilafah State derived from the light of the Quran and Sunnah, encompassing all of its institutions and departments, ready to be implemented immediately!
The Sheikh was arrested numerous times, and was tortured. He migrated to Damascus, planting the sweet fruits of his Dawah there and tasting the bitterness of its prisons and pain of its whips. The waves of the tyrants pushed him out to Iraq, and then to Lebanon, where the persecution took its toll on him and his soul returned to its Creator, leaving behind a global ideological political party which emerged from the blessed land to reach more than 50 countries. The call for Khilafah now has an echo and irritates the beds of tyrants, seen and heard everywhere. Its members work day and night, repelling the attacks of the West and awakening their Ummah whom is embracing them evermore each day, and the Secularists and those who promote corruption and misconceptions flee before them. May Allah have mercy on the Taqi An-Nabhani and allow us to witness the achievement of what he expended his life to see: A Khilafah Rashidah which fills the world with light and justice after it had been covered in tyranny and injustice.
-
Q&A: The Geneva Negotiations and the Attempt to End the War in Sudan
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Geneva Negotiations and the Attempt to End the War in Sudan
(Translated)Question:
The opening session of the Geneva negotiations to end the war in Sudan that has been going on for nearly 16 months was held on Wednesday (14/8/2024) in the presence of international mediation partners, the United States, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Emirates, the African Union and the United Nations, while the Sudanese army was absent from the talks. What is the reason for America’s call to hold a conference in Geneva instead of Jeddah and to expand the participation? And why did the army not attend? Is America’s call for the Geneva negotiations a waste of time without the intention of achieving a ceasefire? Or does it have to do with the English forces that are still resisting? And why is there a repeated confrontation in El Fasher, and what is its importance to both parties? Thank you.
Answer:
For a clear answer for the above questions, we will review the following matters. We will begin with the final question:
First: We mentioned in the “Answer to a Question” on 19/12/2023:
[The conflict will not be resolved quickly, and it may also take some time, because the intention is to limit the conflict between the two sides of America there: The Army Command and the Rapid Support Command, and the outcome of the conflict is controlled by America by dividing the roles between them, to keep the opposition loyal to Britain and Europe paralyzed as it has been since the conflict erupted in mid-April 2023, and then to weaken it to a minimum. To clarify this, we explain the following:
a- On 21/11/2023, the Rapid Support Forces seized the city of El Daein, the capital of East Darfur State. They also seized the headquarters of the Army Command of the 20th Division there without a fight when the Army forces withdrew from it under the pretext of avoiding the danger of confrontations between them and harm to civilians! The Rapid Support Forces claimed in a statement: [“Their victories open a wide door to true peace… and that the state of East Darfur, along with El Daein, will remain safe under its protection.” (Al Jazeera, 22/11/2023)].
Note that El Daein is the stronghold of the Rizeigat tribe, to which Dagalo belongs, the commander of the Rapid Support Forces and most of his commanders and members. Before that, these forces seized the city of Nyala, the capital of South Darfur State, the city of Zalingei, the capital of Central Darfur State, and the city of El Geneina, the capital of West Darfur State. It only remains for them to seize the city of El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur State and the political and administrative capital of the Darfur region. If the RSF capture El Fasher, it would have directed a devastating blow to the pro-English and European movements, especially the Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement].
We also stated in the same Question and Answer: [These movements were determined to defend El Fasher, otherwise it will disappear… especially since the city of El Fasher occupies a strategic location, as its borders are connected to the borders of Libya, Chad, and the western cities of the Darfur region].
And then we added: [… The RSF headed to Darfur in front of the army, becoming the main opposition in the country. Perhaps America in Sudan will have two wings: a political wing of the RSF, but with weapons, to lead the opposition, and a military wing of the army… so that the two wings will serve America’s interests. As for why the RSF opposition is not demilitarized, this is most likely due to two reasons: The first: to contain the European opposition, which is made up of British agents, because eliminating it politically is not easy, but rather it has to be done militarily.
The second: The Rapid Support Forces in Darfur becomes a political opposition with an armed force, so that if America’s interest requires another secession after South Sudan, it will bring to effect this secession in Darfur. It seems that the time has not come for this secession, but preparing the atmosphere for it is currently underway] End of quoting the Question and Answer.
Thus, El Fasher is important to all parties. It is of utmost importance to America and its followers (the army and the Rapid Support Forces) so that the RSF in Darfur can be a political opposition with an armed force, and if America’s interest requires another separation after South Sudan, it will be in Darfur. It is also important to the European opposition, as they have nothing left to rely on in Darfur except El Fasher. If they are expelled from it, this opposition will disappear, especially since the city of El Fasher occupies a strategic location, as its borders connect with the borders of Libya, Chad, and the western cities of the Darfur region… Therefore, they are fighting fiercely there, and this is what has prevented the RSF from controlling El Fasher so far. Although El Fasher is the last stronghold of the army in Darfur, and although they are apparently with the opposition against the RSF, they are not fighting seriously with the opposition against the RSF, otherwise the army would have ended them, as it has sufficient strength. However, the American plan wants the army and the RSF to remain for the purposes we explained above and to eliminate or marginalize the European opposition.
Second: As for the questions about the Geneva Conference, we review them as follows:
1- US Secretary of State Blinken stated on 23/7/2024: [“Washington has invited the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces to participate in talks on a ceasefire by the United States, starting on 14/8/2024 in Switzerland.” He said, “The talks, which are also co-hosted by Saudi Arabia, will include the African Union, Egypt, the Emirates, and the United Nations as observers.” He said, “The talks in Switzerland aim to reach a nationwide cessation of violence, enabling humanitarian access to all those in need, and develop a robust monitoring and verification mechanism to ensure implementation of any agreement.” He pointed out that “the talks do not aim to address broader political issues” (State.gov; France Presse, 23/7/2024)]. As the previous rounds of negotiations held in Jeddah did not want to yield any results, deliberately by America, because it did not want to stop the fighting between the two parties. Blinken’s statement that “These talks do not aim to address broader political issues” means that the Geneva meeting will not result in a cessation of fighting between the two parties, but only negotiations for the sake of negotiations! This is confirmed by the statement of the US State Department spokesman, Matthew Miller, who said [“He cannot assess the possibility of reaching an agreement, but we simply want to bring the two parties back to the negotiating table,” adding, “We hope that this is an opportunity to finally reach a ceasefire” (The Independent Arabia, 24/7/2024)].
Britain also realized that the Geneva negotiations called for by America would not find a solution. The UN envoy Ramtane Lamamra stated in the Security Council meeting on 29/7/2024 about the Geneva meeting called for by America on 14/8/2024, describing the Geneva discussions as [“an encouraging first step in a longer and more complex process”. (Asharq Al-Awsat, 29/7/2024)]. In other words, he announced that he would not reach a solution in this meeting, but rather it was for chatter on the banks of the Rhone River in Geneva! Note that the envoy Ramtane Lamamra, the former Algerian Foreign Minister, is one of Britain’s agents who works to involve the European Union and British agents in the talks related to Sudan, as happened in the Djibouti meeting held on 26 and 27/7/2024, in which more than 20 countries participated in addition to the European Union. It is worth noting that America was able to prevent the appointment of Ramtane Lamamra as an envoy to Libya. However, Britain was able to appoint him as the UN envoy to Sudan.
2- Thus, as soon as America called, through its Secretary of State, to hold a conference in Switzerland, the Rapid Support Forces rushed to respond immediately. Following this statement, on the evening of 23/7/2024, the Commander of the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti), welcomed Blinken’s invitation via the X platform, saying: “I announce our participation in the upcoming ceasefire talks on August 14, 2024 in Switzerland.” This means that Dagalo had previously heard of this invitation, and learned its reasons from the US State Department channels, because he did not hesitate to respond. Although the Commander of the Army and Chairman of the Sovereignty Council, Al-Burhan, also knew, the agreement was that he would abstain and his answer would come late, so that it would appear as if he had sovereignty and could object. Therefore, he requested a meeting with America to consult on the Geneva Conference, as if Al-Burhan could accept or reject without America’s approval! Then he announced the failure of these consultations:
[The Sudanese-American consultations, which paved the way for the army’s participation in negotiations with the RSF, have officially been announced to have stalled. The consultations were held in the Saudi city of Jeddah in response to a request from the government supported by the army leadership and headquartered in Port Sudan, which threatens to fail the Geneva entitlement before it starts on its scheduled date next Wednesday. According to informed sources, the main points of contention that led to the failure of the consultations are the Sudanese delegation’s refusal to allow IGAD and the United Arab Emirates to participate as “observers”, and that participation in the negotiations should be in the name of the government and not the army, and that they should be based on implementing the Jeddah Humanitarian Declaration before entering into any other negotiations. “The head of the delegation, Abu Namu, let the rope loose” and did not make a decision regarding participation in the negotiations, but rather left it to the leadership’s assessments, saying: “The matter is ultimately up to the leadership’s decision and assessments.” [Asharq Al-Awsat, 13/8/2024]
3-Thus, the Jeddah consultations failed to agree to the Switzerland meeting and fabricated a reason for that, that the invitation was for the army or the government?! As if Al Burhan could reject America’s request for the Geneva meeting if it was serious about it! Rather, it is to distract the parties with the subject of negotiations until America ends the European influence in Sudan and reaches the solution it wants to be a positive incentive for it in the upcoming elections. As for the reason for this American delay until now due to the failure to find a solution to the Sudan problem, it is because the European and English parties are still strong in Sudan. As we mentioned earlier, America worked to highlight the conflict between Al-Burhan and Hemedti to marginalize the European powers, but so far it has not achieved this goal, as the activity of the English in Sudan was strengthened by the UAE, after it failed by Kenya, which demanded the introduction of peacekeeping forces to stop the fighting and involve the civilian component formed by English agents in the negotiations. So, they failed in both, “stopping the fighting and involving the civilian component.”
4-The Sudanese government and Al Burhan are aware of this, as the Sudanese and Emirati representatives to the United Nations exchanged altercations during a Security Council session on 18/6/2024, the Sudanese representative, Al-Harith Idris Al-Harith, confirmed that [“he has evidence of the UAE’s support for the RSF,” and the Emirati representative, Mohammed Abu Shahab, responded that these were “false accusations” and said: “There will be no victory or military settlement of the conflict in Sudan, and the negotiating table is the only way to resolve it.” (CNN, 19/6/2024)]. With this statement, the UAE announces that it is intervening in the ongoing conflict in Sudan. It was preceded by an exchange of expulsions of diplomats between the two parties. Britain began the same game that America plays against its agents to contain them, by placing them under the command of the army or under the command of the RSF. Britain, through the UAE, began supporting the RSF to protect its agents and strengthen their presence, so that the RSF cannot get rid of them or control them.
British agents, under the name “Taqadum” (the Progress) Coordination and led by Abdullah Hamdok, the former Sudanese Prime Minister who was overthrown by Al Burhan and Hemedti in 2021, began to make noticeable moves. On 3/4/2024, the Sudanese Public Prosecution issued a decision to arrest 16 leaders of the Coordination, headed by Hamdok, and demanded that they surrender to the prosecution on charges of [“support, assistance and agreement, crimes against the state, undermining the constitutional system, war crimes, and genocide”… (Sudanese TV, 3/4/2024)], but it did not arrest anyone and none of them surrendered themselves, which indicates the weakness of Al-Burhan regime’s will in the face of the British agents. Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan also refuses to even negotiate with it: [“Al-Burhan, Chairman of the Sovereignty Council in Sudan, announced on Thursday his refusal to negotiate with the Coordination of Civilian Democratic Forces (Taqadum).” (Anadolu Agency, 6/6/2024)].
5- The UAE’s support for the Rapid Support Forces serves the interests of its master Britain in Sudan, not because the RSF Commander Dagalo is an agent of Britain, but rather an agent of America. It wants to foil the American plan in Sudan by infiltrating with Dagalo and his RSF. Just as it did in Libya, where it gave a role to its agent, the UAE, to infiltrate Haftar, an agent of America, and provide him with support to influence him and foil his movement against Britain’s agents in the capital, Tripoli. It also gave it a role in Yemen, where the UAE infiltrated the alliance formed by America, headed by Saudi Arabia, in Operation Decisive Storm to intervene in Yemen. Britain exploited this to support its agents and enable them to control southern Yemen and expel the Houthis, America’s agents, from it. It almost took control of Hodeidah and then head towards Sanaa to overthrow the Houthis, had it not been for the propaganda created by America that the people of Hodeidah were dying of hunger and disease. The Stockholm Conference was held on 13/12/2018 and stopped the advance of the UAE and its allies from southern Yemen… This is Britain’s cunning in international politics!
6- Thus, America is stalling in finding a solution, the Rapid Support Forces agree and the army refuses, and so on… and the negotiations move from Jeddah to Cairo to Geneva, not to find a solution, but to stall in finding a solution: [… and the ruling Transitional Sovereignty Council said in a statement, “Based on contact with the American government represented by the American envoy to Sudan, Tom Perriello, and a contact from the Egyptian government requesting a meeting with a government delegation in Cairo to discuss the government’s vision for implementing the Jeddah Agreement, the government will send a delegation to Cairo for this purpose.” He added that the Jeddah Agreement stipulates that the Rapid Support Forces leave civilian areas…” (Al-Marsad-Arabi, 19/8/2024)].
7- Conclusion:
a- It is likely that misleading decisions will be issued hoping to stop the fighting between the Sudanese army (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) at the Geneva Conference on 14/8/2024, scheduled to last for 10 days: [The Geneva talks are scheduled to last for up to ten days under American-Saudi sponsorship… (Al Jazeera, 14/8/2024)] but only ineffectively and remain ink on paper. If it happens, it will be temporary and will not last; as America has not yet achieved its goals. It will be sufficient to focus on delivering humanitarian aid. [The Sudanese government announced that it will allow the passage of humanitarian aid through the Adre crossing across the border with Chad. The seven international parties participating in the Geneva Conference welcomed this step… (Sky News Arabia, 17/8/2024)]. [The United States described the Geneva negotiations as a new model, stressing that the goal of the talks is to expand the scope of delivering aid and reopen humanitarian corridors. (Al Jazeera, 20/8/2024)].
b- America’s inability to keep Britain out of the scene in Sudan still remains, especially through its regional agents such as the Emirates and its local agents such as the Taqadum Coordination. This made America reconsider its calculations and involve the Emirates in the Geneva Conference, although it had previously confined the work related to the Sudanese issue between itself and its Saudi agent in the Jeddah platform without considering the European powers (Freedom and Change). When Taqadum appeared, which is more effective than the Freedom and Change and behind it the Emirates, America decided the involvement of the Emirates in the conference as a matter of evasion and deception without actually being serious about finding a solution to stop the fighting!
c- All of this is a loss for the Muslim people of Sudan. The killer and the killed among them are as the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: «إِذَا الْتَقَى الْمُسْلِمَانِ بِسَيْفَيْهِمَا فَالْقَاتِلُ وَالْمَقْتُولُ فِي النَّارِ»“If two Muslims meet with their swords, the killer and the killed will be in Hellfire.” The sincere people in the army and among the people must move to bring down all these conspiracies and get rid of the agents, for they are the root of the calamity and through them the colonizers are able to carry out all these conspiracies. All the sincere people must also move to support Hizb ut Tahrir, the sincere political leadership that has not stopped exposing these conspiracies for decades and whose opinion has been correct every time. The sincere people of power must support it to support Allah’s Deen and to strengthen it.
[وَلَيَنصُرَنَّ اللهُ مَن يَّنْصُرُهُ إِنَّ اللهَ لَقَوِيٌّ عَزِيزٌ]
“Allah will certainly help those who stand up for Him. Allah is truly All-Powerful, Almighty” [Al-Hajj: 40]
15 Safar Al Khair 1446 AH
Corresponding to 20/8/2024 CE -
Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Resigns and Flees the Country
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Resigns and Flees the Country
(Translated)Question:
On 5 August 2024, the resignation of the Prime Minister of Bangladesh and her escape abroad was announced after the protests against the quota system for jobs required in the public sector since the beginning of last month. The protests turned bloody since the middle of last month, as followers of the ruling party clashed with protesters. The army announced its assumption of power, and the country’s president announced the dissolution of parliament and the appointment of an interim government. Were the protests premeditated? Did the army’s intervention come with an agreement? Is this related to the international conflict over the country?
Answer:
To clarify the answer to the above questions, we will review the following matters:
1- Bangladesh is an Islamic country. During the early years of the thirteenth century CE, Muslims conquered Bengal during the campaign of Muhammad Al-Ghori in late 1192 CE, which extended across northern India. Bangladesh, the eighth largest country in the world in terms of population, with a population of about 171 million, is located in South Asia and is bordered by Myanmar and India. More than 90% of the population is Muslim and the official religion of the country is Islam. As part of the policy of divide and rule followed by Britain, the Awami League, which was based in East Pakistan and headed by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the British agent, and supported by the British, declared its independence from Pakistan after the war with Pakistan in 1971.
2- Bangladeshi Prime Minister Hasina inherited her subordination to Britain, the country’s former colonial ruler, from her father, former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Mujibur Rahman, head of the Awami League, who was executed with his family in 1975 by officers who staged a coup against him. She survived because she was abroad during the coup. She lived in Britain (Correction: India) until she was allowed to return to her country and resume political activity in 1981. She first served as Prime Minister between 1996 and 2001, and has since led the government since 2009. She was accused of rigging the elections held earlier this year, in which she won an overwhelming majority in parliament formed by her party, the Awami League, with 233 out of 300 members of the parliament, in addition to 9 members from a party allied with her party. The other parties rejected the results and considered them sham elections, and America also criticized them. However, Hasina’s regime officially acknowledged her victory!
3- During her rule, Hasina worked to strike the American agents and establish the British influence in the army, political circles, the judiciary, and other centers. She was competing with the leader of the opposition party, the head of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, Khaleda Zia, who inherited the subordination for America from her husband, General Ziaur Rahman, who came to power in 1977 and was assassinated in 1981 by British agents. His wife, Khaleda Zia, took over the government for two terms between 1991 and 1996 and between 2001 and 2006. She was later convicted of corruption and abuse of power. She and the detainees were released during the recent demonstrations after Hasina fled on 5/8/2024. Therefore, there is an international conflict in Bangladesh between the old colonizer, Britain, which has strong influence, and its new colonizer, America, which has created influence by gaining agents in the army since its agent, General Ziaur Rahman, seized power in 1977. It has also found agents in the political circles, especially General Zia’s wife and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. However, the predominant influence is the British influence.
4- Hasina and her government have fought those who seek the return of Islam to power because she is secular and her party is secular and nationalistic. Politically she is subservient to the Western colonialists who are fighting Islam and its return to power. So she banned Hizb ut Tahrir on 22/10/2009 because it calls for the return of Islam to power by establishing the Khilafah Rashidah (rightly-guided Caliphate) state, knowing that Hizb ut Tahrir is a political party whose ideology is Islam and does not adopt material actions as its method, but rather engages in political and intellectual struggle. She also banned four other Islamic groups. She threw many members from Hizb ut Tahrir and other groups into prisons, and executed some Islamic leaders. [Hasina Wajid began her political purges against the Jamaat-e-Islami since 2013 under the pretext that they were war criminals who rejected the independence of Bangladesh, while the goal was to get rid of the Islamic movement. Among the most prominent figures who have been arrested, executed, or died in prison from the leaders of the Jamaat-e-Islami so far are seven senior scholars, five of whom were hanged, and two died in prison before being sentenced to death. (https://alestiklal.net/, 6/8/2024)]. Hasina was extremely hostile to Islam and to those who called for its return to power and the unity of Muslims in one state. She headed a secular party founded by her father, who committed high treason, separating East Pakistan (Bangladesh) from West Pakistan with the support of Britain and its agents in India in 1971.
5- Bangladesh is suffering from intractable economic crises due to the lack of a renaissance and due to its connection to foreign political and economic powers. It is estimated that about 18 million young Bangladeshis are looking for jobs, and university graduates face striking unemployment rates! More than 40% of the Bangladeshi population between the ages of 15 and 24 are unemployed and uneducated. On 5 August 2024, the BBC reported interviews about the economic situation in Bangladesh. Lutfey Siddiqi, a visiting professor-in-practice at the London School of Economics said, “Regime change in Bangladesh an economic inevitability– a matter of when, not if. Sheikh Hasina’s government appears to have lost both the right and might to govern. Soon it will run out of the resources to do so as well… Bangladesh is on the verge of economic implosion.” It is worth noting that Hasina’s government has mortgaged the country’s economy and resources to foreign companies, especially British, American, Chinese and Indian. It began to rely on interest-bearing loans under unfair conditions from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, two institutions dominated by America, in addition to the Chinese Asian Development Bank. This meant that the situation in Bangladesh was critical and on the verge of explosion.
6- Bangladesh has been witnessing a wave of student protests since the beginning of last month, on 1 July 2024, against the employment system. The protests aimed to abolish the quota system in the public sector, which allocates about 56% of jobs to specific groups, which the Prime Minister and her entourage exploited to employ their relatives and supporters and deprive the opponents. Among these specific groups who were included in the jobs were “those who participated with her father and their sons” in the high treason in the war of secession between East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and West Pakistan with the support of Britain and its agents in India in 1971. This was the employment system against which the protests began, as students demanded that employment be based on the person’s merit and not for other considerations. These protests influenced the abolition of this system, so the Supreme Court in Bangladesh declared on 21/7/2024 that the decision to reintroduce job quotas was illegal. However, this did not help silence the protesters. The first deaths in these protests occurred on 16/7/2024 when students from Hasina’s party confronted protesters in Dhaka with sticks and threw stones at each other.
7- To stop these protests, Hasina’s government ordered the closure of schools and universities across the country. Hasina made statements calling on students to remain calm and vowed to punish every murder in the protests. But the protesters rejected her statements and began targeting her in particular, chanting “Down with the dictator”, and burned down the headquarters of the state broadcasting corporation in Bangladesh and dozens of other government buildings. The government cut off internet services. The protests became more intense and the number of dead and wounded increased daily. A 24-hour curfew was declared and soldiers were deployed. The police fired live bullets and tear gas at the protesters, declared a curfew across the country, and deployed the army to maintain security. By the evening of 19/7/2024, 105 people were reported killed. Naeemul Islam Khan, spokesman for the Prime Minister’s Office, said: (“The government has decided to impose a curfew and deploy the army to assist the civilian authorities.” (AFP, 19/7/2024)). Communications, news channels and some mobile phone services were cut off in an attempt to suppress the protests. Protesters stormed a prison and freed hundreds of inmates on 19/7/2024, before setting the building on fire. The total number of deaths in the protests in Bangladesh has reached 409, according to AFP, based on statements from police, government officials and doctors. The events appear to have erupted as spontaneous student protests against a job system that denies most jobs. The protests were not limited to students, with people from all walks of life joining in numbers that reached 400,000. These demonstrations were seen as an unprecedented challenge and threat to Hasina’s 15-year authoritarian rule.
8- On 5/8/2024, Bangladesh Army Chief General Waker-Uz-Zaman announced that he would take full responsibility after Hasina’s resignation and escape, and would form an interim government. He said on state television, “I promise you that all grievances will be addressed.” He said, “The country has suffered a lot, the economy has been hit, many people have been killed — it is time to stop the violence, I hope after my speech, the situation will improve,” (AFP, 5/8/2024). General Waker-Uz-Zaman was an infantry officer who was appointed army chief last June. Hasina trusted him because of their distant kinship, and he worked as an advisor to her in her office. His father-in-law was the army commander during Hasina’s first term in office from 1996 to 2001. Waker-Uz-Zaman received military training in Britain and holds a master’s degree in defense studies from the Bangladesh National University and King’s College London, which confirms that he is of the same type as Hasina’s regime, which is loyal to Britain, which instructed him to seize power and maintain its influence in Bangladesh. He also agreed with Hasina that she should leave in order to save her life, because her continued presence would exacerbate the crisis and more blood would be shed. After that, the army tried to get closer to the protesters to calm the situation, so on the penultimate day of its seizure of power, the army allowed the protests and prevented shooting at any of the protesters as a way of getting closer to them to calm them down.
9- When the army chief, General Waker-Uz-Zaman, announced that he was taking over the country, he promised to form an interim government as soon as possible, and that he would hold talks with major opposition parties and members of civil society, but excluding the Awami League, Hasina’s party. To please America and block it, from the malice of British politics, the presidency in Bangladesh announced on 7/8/2024 that Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, would head the interim government. The presidency’s statement said [“The decision to form an interim government headed by Yunus was taken during a meeting between President Muhammad Shahabuddin, senior army officers and leaders of the Students Against Discrimination Group. The statement said, “The president has asked the people to help ride out the crisis. Quick formation of an interim government is necessary to overcome the crisis,” (AFP 7/8/2024)]. Following this, Muhammad Yunus, who is in Europe and is 84 years old, announced that he is ready to assume the presidency of an interim government. Thus, the British worked to save themselves from collapse and maintained their influence when their agent fled to India on board a military helicopter under the pressure of the protests, the government and parliament were dissolved, with the army commander taking control and an old American agent like Muhammad Yunus being appointed to head the interim government until the next parliamentary elections and the formation of a new elected government. In this way, they worked to silence the protesters by deporting Hasina and appeasing America by appointing Muhammad Yunus, who is loyal to it. Former US President Bill Clinton had previously praised him as deserving of the Nobel Prize: [Professor Muhammad Yunus won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, shared with Grameen Bank. US President Bill Clinton was advocating for the Nobel Prize to be awarded to Muhammad Yunus. During a speech he gave in 2002, President Clinton described “Dr. Yunus is a man who long ago should have won the Nobel Prize” (Al-Jumhur, Tuesday 6/8/2024)]. It is worth noting that Hasina was fighting him, as a Bangladeshi court sentenced him on 1/1/2024 to 6 months in prison on charges of violating labour laws in the capital, Dhaka. (Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus has been convicted of violating Bangladesh’s labour laws, Attorney General Khurshid Alam Khan told AFP on Monday, in a case his supporters say is politically motivated. Alam Khan told AFP that Yunus and his colleagues were convicted under labour laws and sentenced to six months in prison, noting that they were released on bail pending appeal. 160 international figures, including former US President Obama and former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, published a joint open letter denouncing the ongoing judicial harassment of Yunus and expressing concerns for his security and freedom. (Asharq Al-Awsat, 1/1/2024). Thus, Muhammad Yunus was approved by America. And the British scheming was able to quell the protests by exiling Hasina… and to satisfy America by appointing an old loyalist… and furthermore Britain, remains in control of Bangladesh through the army commander, as it was before Hasina fled.
10- Thus, the international conflict in Bangladesh remains ongoing, and the agents who adopt the colonizer’s viewpoint, whichever one, and seek to serve the interests of the kaffir colonizers are the losers in this world and the Hereafter. As for the loss in this world, the humiliation will surround their necks because of their sins. As for in the loss in the Hereafter, it is the painful punishment.
[سَيُصِيبُ الَّذِينَ أَجْرَمُوا صَغَارٌ عِنْدَ اللهِ وَعَذَابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَمْكُرُونَ]
“The wicked will soon be overwhelmed by humiliation from Allah and a severe punishment for their evil plots” [Al-An’am: 124].
If they were rational, they would have learned from what happened to their likes from the agents in every country, especially in the Islamic countries. They were either imprisoned, killed, or have fled the country in humiliation! They do not learn from those who came before them, but rather continue in their error blindly! Why do they not return to their Lord, hold fast to His Deen, and support those who work to establish the Deen embodied in its state; the state of the Khilafah Rashidah (Rightly-Guided Caliphate) on the method of the Prophethood?! The state that the Messenger of Allah (saw) gave glad tidings of in his noble Hadith that was narrated by Ahmad and al-Tayalisi: «ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةٌ عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ»“Then there will be Khilafah on the method of Prophethood.” Why would they not return to their Lord if they only had reason?!
[إِنَّ فِي ذَلِكَ لَذِكْرَى لِمَنْ كَانَ لَهُ قَلْبٌ أَوْ أَلْقَى السَّمْعَ وَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ]
“Surely in this is a reminder for whoever has a ˹mindful˺ heart and lends an attentive ear” [Qaf: 37]
11 Safar al Khair 1446 AH
16/8/2024 CE -
Fear Leads to Success or Ruin
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Everyone in this world is fearful of something. The emotion is a powerful one. It can drive you to ruin or enable you to achieve great things. Understanding this is important, especially when we consider the reality that we are currently faced with.
On one side, we have the Muslim rulers who are not only oppressing their own people. They are allowing a genocide to take place in Gaza, while also actively working to stall the spread of Islam; harassing, arresting, torturing, and in some cases killing the Muslims who are working against them.
These rulers are not different from the Quraysh at the time of the Prophet (saw), whose fear of Islam led them to commit heinous acts against the Muslims living in Mecca, subjecting the first Muslims to torture, humiliation and death as well as exile and seclusion in the Valley of Abu Talib.
They, like the rulers of today, understood that if the Muslims stood firm in their belief of Islam, it would threaten the power and influence that they clung to. They feared this loss, and this fear led to their eventual ruin in this life and the next.
We can see choices of the Quraysh echoed in the rulers of today. When, in the case of Uzbekistan, they have punished the Shabab who are working to free the world from this oppressive, hypocrite system. 23 men were re-arrested after 20 years in prison – on the same charges for which they had already served time!
This is not the act of someone who is in the right- it’s the act of a regime who fears the loss of power and influence, and works to circumvent any action that will lead to that end. It’s the act of a regime that is willing following the lead of the USA and ‘Israel’ – despite having previously claimed that they wanted to move away from the oppression and brutality of the previous regime.
They have made it clear that they are firm in their support of secularism, and will do whatever it takes to try to secure it.
“For the past decade, with increasing intensity, the government of Uzbekistan has persecuted independent Muslims. This campaign of religious persecution has resulted in the arrest, torture, public degradation, and incarceration in grossly inhumane conditions of an estimated 7,000 people.
The campaign targets nonviolent believers who preach or study Islam outside the official institutions and guidelines. They include independent imams and their followers, so-called Wahhabis”. The most numerous targets were adherents of the nonviolent group Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation), whose teachings in favor of an Islamic state the government finds seditious. In the early and mid-1990s, the government justified the repression of independent Islam as an effort to preserve secularism. Beginning in 1998 it referred to the need to prevent terrorism, and today the Uzbek government places the arrests firmly in the context of the global campaign against terrorism begun in response to the events of September 11, 2001.” (Source)
“President Shavkat Mirziyoyev received credit early on for initiating reforms granting more religious freedoms in Uzbekistan, but what we’re seeing today is a mixed record, in which serious abuses occur with impunity…The Uzbekistan authorities still consider legitimate expression of religious sentiment or belief ‘extremism,’ and peaceful religious communities and individuals are paying the price.
In late April, Human Rights Watch wrote to the Uzbek government to share its preliminary findings and request information about restrictions on religious freedom in Uzbekistan. In a written response, the Uzbek government did not acknowledge any restrictions and claimed that the “legal framework [in Uzbekistan] fully meets international standards and ensures the rights of everyone to freedom of conscience and religion…” (Source)
This fear, and arrogance, will lead to their downfall. The world is shifting, and the Ummah is waking us. Their actions allow us all – Muslims, and non-Muslims- to see the true colors of the guardians of Capitalism, guardians who claim to be ‘civilized’ proponents of law, justice and human rights. This makes it harder for them to hide behind ‘ideals’, as people realise that the hypocrisy is embedded in the system. And thus, begin to rethink their support of it.
But the fear that is in the hearts of these regimes also stops them from seeing the truth – that while they fight to keep control of their wealth and influence, if and when Allah wills, they will lose it all. They will lose it, despite their efforts to keep hold of it, just as the Quraysh did at the time of the Prophet (saw). They forget, or willfully ignore, the fact that they can only control their own actions – the results are in Allah’s hands. They forget that Rizq and Ajal are also from Allah (swt), and when they return to Him they will be made to answer for their choices.
They forget – but the strong Muslims in the Ummah do not. Nor do those who work to speak out against the atrocities that are being committed in Gaza, and the rest of the world. A Muslim understands why he has been placed on this earth, and understands that when we return to Allah we will answer for our actions. It’s this understanding that fills the Muslims with fear – not of this world, or of the people within it. It fills us with fear of Allah (swt) and encourages us to abide by His Laws so that we will be successful in this world and the next.
[الَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَالَاتِ اللَّهِ وَيَخْشَوْنَهُ وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ]
“Those who convey the message of Allah and fear Him, and fear none except Allah…” [al-Ahzab; 39]
It’s this fear that allows the Muslims of today to persevere and stand strong despite the atrocities that are being committed against them. It’s this fear that led the Muslims of the past to establish the First Islamic State, which ruled over this world for 1400 years. It’s this fear that led the Muslims of the past to adhere to Islam in their everyday life, caring for the affairs of the people, while also making scientific achievements – achievements which allowed the Islamic State to have an era of advancements while Europe was struggling through the Dark Ages.
The fear of Allah is not one that keeps them behind, it does not stop him from leaving the house or protecting their loved ones. It does not tell us to ignore the world, or to stay in our homes praying.
It tells us to strive for success in this life and the next by applying Allah’s commands to every aspect of our life. The command of Enjoining the Good (Marouf) and Forbidding Evil (Munkar), the commands of individual acts of worship, and the command to wage Jihad when our Muslim brothers and sisters are being attacked by the enemy. It tells us to strive to provide for our family while also remembering that Rizq if from Allah (swt). It tells us to account the rulers and establish Islam as a system in this world.
The fear of Allah (swt) is one that drives us to stick to the truth – no matter what. It’s what gives the Muslims in Uzbekistan the strength to continue with their call. They know that in the end, Allah will grant us success when He deems it to be the correct time, and will reward them for their efforts in the Hereafter – both of which the evil people in this life will be unable to stop, no matter how many Muslims they arrest, torture and kill.
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said,«إِنَّ أَحَبَّ الْكَلاَمِ إِلَى اللهِ أَنْ يَقُولَ الْعَبْدُ: سُبْحَانَكَ اللَّهُمَّ وَبِحَمْدِكَ، وَتَبَارَكَ اسْمُكَ، وَتَعَالَى جَدُّكَ، وَلاَ إِلَهَ غَيْرَكَ، وَإِنَّ أَبْغَضَ الْكَلاَمِ إِلَى اللهِ أَنْ يَقُولَ الرَّجُلُ لِلرَّجُلِ: اتَّقِ اللَّهَ فَيَقُولُ: عَلَيْكَ نَفْسَكَ»
“Verily, the most beloved statement to Allah is for a servant to say, ‘Glory be to You, O Allah, and Your praises. Blessed is Your name, exalted is Your majesty, and there is no God besides You.’ The most hateful statement to Allah is for a man to say to another man, ‘Fear Allah!’ and he replies, ‘Mind yourself!’” (Sunan al-Kubrá lil-Nasā’ī 10619)
صرخة_من_أوزبيكستان#
#PleaFromUzbekistan
#ЎЗБЕКИСТОНДАН_ФАРЁДFatima Musab
-
Gaza: The War of Jewish Illusions and Dreams of a Greater Jewish State
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيمGaza: The War of Jewish Illusions and Dreams of a Greater Jewish State
(Translated)https://www.al-waie.org/archives/article/19388
Al Waei Magazine Issue 455
In its 39th Year, Dhul-Hijjah 1445 AH, Corresponding to July 2024 CE
Dr. Muhammad GilaniNo one can believe that the war waged by the Jewish entity in Gaza, Rafah and northern Palestine is merely a response, revenge and retaliation for the Al-Aqsa Flood operation launched by Hamas on 7 October, 2023. Despite the sympathy that the entity received at the beginning of the war, the international community, represented by states, institutions, unions, universities, and individuals, turned to accusing the entity of acts of genocide. It was practically condemned for committing war atrocities and genocide, whilst killing children, women and the elderly. It was condemned for demolishing schools, hospitals, and masajids. These acts and crimes could not merely be a reaction to the Al-Aqsa Flood operation. The enemy’s prime minister was then accused of being a war criminal and compared to the Nazi Hitler and the Serbian Milosevic. To this day, the entity still refuses, and evades all attempts, to stop the criminal war. What are the real reasons behind this brutal war and heinous crime? What are the expected outcomes?
1- Motives and Causes
The establishment of a Jewish entity in Palestine dates back to the British Foreign Minister’s Balfour Declaration. The declaration stipulated granting the Zionist Jewish movement a national homeland in Palestine, in partnership with the people of Palestine. It set out the condition that there must not be any kind of discrimination against the original citizens of the people of Palestine. The League of Nations adopted the Balfour Resolution and recommended that the British mandate should work to facilitate the immigration of Jews to Palestine. Britain sought to encourage Jewish immigration and facilitate travel and settlement operations in Palestine. It added the Hebrew language to the documents that were issued by the Palestinian government. Then World War II and the panic among European Jews were exploited, through massacres that were promoted to push Jews to immigrate to Palestine. This was the nucleus of a single state that Britain wanted. That state would include Jews and Palestinians, whilst providing political leadership for the Zionist movement. Before beginning the work of officially establishing the entity and submitting it to the United Nations, America presented another solution to the issue of establishing a single Jewish entity, which is that of two states. The Macdonald White Paper, which was carried by the United Nations Resolution No. 181, stipulated the establishment of two entities in Palestine, one for the Jews on an area of 42% of the territory of Palestine, and an entity for the Palestinians on an area of 56%. The remaining 2% of the area was to be an international territory, and included Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and Bethlehem. While the Jews and the Zionist movement accepted this decision as a first stage for their state, the Arabs, including the Arab League, rejected it. The main reason for the Arabs’ rejection of the partition decision was due to their dependence on Britain, the architect of the first project for a single state. Britain saw the American two-state solution project as a threat to its interests and influence in the region.
2- The First Displacement
A new entity was created in Palestine, known as the State of ‘Israel’, through military occupation, and with the complicity of Britain and the countries subordinate to it, which were Egypt, Jordan, and Palestine. A United Nations’ resolution established the State of ‘Israel’, with the recognition of the modern entity, by the major powers and the United Nations. It included most of the lands of Palestine, with the exception of Gaza and the West Bank of the Jordan River. As for Gaza, it was administratively annexed to Egypt, which was ruled by King Farouk under British influence. The West Bank of the Jordan River was annexed to the Emirate of Transjordan, under British influence and occupation. It then became called the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The Jewish entity displaced more than 750,000 people of Palestine to the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan, so that the Jews in occupied Palestine became the vast majority. The people displaced in 1948 were called “refugees.” The Refugee Relief Agency was created specifically to take care of the affairs of the displaced in refugee camps. The Jews realized, from the beginning, that the demographic composition of Palestine would change in favor of the Palestinians within a few decades. They realized that the number of Palestinians in the Jewish entity would likely exceed half by the year 2050 CE. This great and rapid change has always been a source of anxiety and terror for the Jews. Their leaders expressed it explicitly during the Gaza War by saying, “‘Israel’ is fighting a war of survival.”
3- The Second Displacement
In 1967 CE, the Jewish entity was able to occupy the rest of Palestine, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. It resulted in a second displacement process, as more than 250,000 were displaced from the West Bank and Gaza, including the refugees of 1948 CE. The displaced people, after the June 1967 war, were called “displaced people” to distinguish them from the refugees of 1948 CE. The vast majority of the displaced were displaced to Jordan. After the Oslo Accords in 1993 CE, the administration of the West Bank and Gaza Strip was officially handed over to the Palestinian Authority, although in principle these areas are still subject to the control of the occupation, whether the occupation army is present there permanently, or intermittently. Then Hamas was able to rise to power through elections in Gaza, whereupon Hamas gained control of influence in Gaza. In 2005, the Jewish occupation decided to withdraw its forces from Gaza unilaterally, and without any agreement. However, officially and practically, the entity remains the occupier of the Gaza Strip, even when it does not have an army there.
The occupation has built semi-permanent settlements in the West Bank, where more than 700,000 Jews have been settled. These settlements are not subject to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Thus, the Jewish entity was able to create two displacements of the people of Palestine from the lands of Palestine. The number of displaced Palestinians outside the lands of Palestine now exceeds three million. By forcefully seizing the property of the people of Palestine in the West Bank, and building settlements on them, the area of the rest of the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority has become less than 20% of the original area.
Local and international political circumstances, especially the Anglo-American struggle for influence in the region, which have prevailed since the establishment of this entity, have necessitated the continued presence, even if partially, of Palestinians on the land of Palestine, which the entire Jewish entity from the sea to the river, considers to be the state of ‘Israel’. So, not all the Palestinians were displaced at once.
4- The Third Displacement
There has now been talk again about a third displacement of Palestinians, according to which the vast majority of those remaining in Palestine will be displaced, whether those under occupation since 1948 CE, or those under occupation since 1967 CE. The Jewish entity does not stop striving to achieve its goal of completing the construction of their state on the entire land of Palestine, and displacing the remaining Palestinians from it. On 7 October, 2022, Haaretz published an article under the title, “Nakba Scenario 2023: The Expulsion of 200,000 Arabs from ‘Israel’ Within Two days.” The article stated, “The leaders of Likud and the Jewish forces do not hide their plans regarding the displacement of the Arabs of ‘Israel’.” Ben Gvir also pledged that he would form a “national body to encourage immigration” that would work to “remove Israel’s enemies from the Land of Israel.” Dr. Michael Ben Ari also announced that he would work to encourage the immigration of “the Arabs of Umm al-Fahm who dance on the rooftops when Jews are slaughtered.” Haaretz published a plan for the displacement operation, stating that the IDF has a mechanism to displace more than 200,000 people within two days. The plan begins by initiating battles in Syria and Lebanon, and then the Jewish entity is to be exposed to attacks from Hezbollah with missiles and drones.
As the Jewish army moves and passes through Arab villages, the cars and vehicles of the Jewish army are exposed to Molotov cocktails and stone throwing by Arab citizens. Jewish forces carry out forced displacement, under the pretext of removing obstacles to the military actions of the Jewish occupation army. Within two days, 200,000 Palestinians will be displaced to the West Bank. The scenario stated that the site of displacement would most likely be in the Jenin camp. What was published in Haaretz is not necessarily accurate. However, it reveals the thinking and intentions of Jewish leaders in occupied Palestine, and that displacement is an ongoing goal. It is not unlikely that Jordan, which was created as the emirate of Transjordan, will eventually be a site for the displaced, which means a transitional emirate, or an emirate of displacement. In the special session of the United Nation’s Security Council on 6 January 2023 CE, the Jewish entity’s ambassador’s claim that Jordan was occupying the West Bank, was the beginning of the Jewish entity’s intentions and motives being revealed publicly and officially. This was followed by a minister in the entity’s government highlighting the map of the Jewish entity, which includes a large part of Jordan.
America’s declaration repeatedly that it does not approve of the forced displacement of more than a million Gazans out of Gaza is nothing but a clear demonstration of the entity’s motives for this war. The most important of the motives is emptying Palestine of its people, and establishing the entity’s occupation over all of the land of Palestine, and considering it purely Jewish. Despite America’s announcement of its rejection of “forced” displacement, Biden, in his first visit to the entity after 7 October, 2023, had publicly stated that he stands behind the Jewishness of the state when he said, “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.” In addition, America itself declares that it opposes forced displacement, but not absolute displacement. There is no doubt that the choice of words and expressions are tools of political deception.
The issue of the third displacement of Palestinians is not just propaganda. It is the result of serious planning, especially since Jewish leaders know that America is in the process of building a new Middle East. This is after America was able to uproot English influence from Iran and Iraq, and was able to find a strong influence in Saudi Arabia, whilst bringing Turkey to its side. Hence, the Jews see that time is not on their side. They must do what is necessary to preserve the Jewishness of their state. They must get rid of an imminent danger represented by Gaza and the West Bank in its flanks, and the Palestinians of the interior, within its heart.
5- The Two-State Solution: The American Vision
After the June War of 1967 CE, the United Nation’s Security Council issued Resolution 242, drafted by the British Ambassador, Lord Caradon. It stipulated the withdrawal of Jewish forces from some of the lands they had occupied, without specifying these lands and the time required for withdrawal. Nothing was achieved from implementing that decision. In 1969, America presented an alternative to Resolution 242, with what was later known as the Rogers Plan. It included the re-proposing of the two-state solution. However, this proposal clashed once again with the stance of Britain and its agents in the region. America came back and proposed the two-state solution again after the 1973 War, when it was then able to get Egypt out of confrontation with the occupying state.
Once again, America saw that the conditions were appropriate to impose a two-state solution, one state for the Jews and the other for the Palestinians. American officials, led by President Biden, stated that after the end of the war, which they called the “day after,” they must work directly on the two-state solution. The occupying state has always rejected the two-state solution, and considers the establishment of a Palestinian state an existential threat to the Jewish entity.
America had not previously defined the features of these two proposed states, specifically in terms of identity and borders. However, now it has begun to declare that it agrees with the Jews that their state should be Jewish, meaning that its citizens are only Jews, versus another state whose citizens are Palestinian. The Jewishness of the state has become a basic demand of the occupying entity. This has been declared and discussed in various ways, in a clear and unambiguous manner, especially since the demographic composition of the occupying entity in twenty to thirty years will favor the Palestinian identity. Biden has reiterated the emphasis on a democratic Jewish state, and even linked the stability of the Middle East to the existence of a recognized Jewish state. His Secretary of State also repeated this many times. This means that the war on Gaza has created a fertile medium for announcing some of what was previously hidden. The Jewish entity has also begun to reveal the borders of their state, which they want, little by little. The talk about the displacement of Palestinians from the part occupied in 1948 was explicitly discussed in the Haaretz article, which was previously discussed under point 4 of this article. The talk that was repeated excessively during the war on Gaza about the displacement of the people of Gaza to the Sinai Desert, and the displacement of the people of the West Bank to eastern Jordan is nothing but a clear indication of the plans of the Jews. The plan seems to have no real forces standing as an obstacle before the Jews to prevent the implementation of these plans in practice. Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, was reported to have said, “I fear that the people of the West Bank will be displaced to eastern Jordan,” according to what Ammon News reported on 15 May 2024. I do not think that Abbas’s fear is unfounded. As for America, when it announces its rejection of displacement, it adds the word, “forced displacement” to interpret whether the displacement was forced, or voluntary, according to what it deems appropriate. Also, when America talks about the re-occupation of Gaza and American rejection of it, America adds to it the phrase “long-term occupation.” It lets the interpreters interpret whatever they want, though the meaning is in the heart of the speaker, not the interpreter.
The talk that is sometimes repeated in Jordanian and Palestinian circles is that Jordan is an alternative homeland to Palestine. This is nothing but a systemic leak indicating that this matter is being discussed in the corridors of global intelligence, and those steering the course of events.
The bottom line is that the Jewish entity today categorically rejects the so-called two-state solution, as long as their state has a large number of Palestinian Arabs, whose percentage will exceed 50% by the year 2050. It rejects the presence of Palestinians in two geographical units, Gaza in the western flank of the entity, and the West Bank in the eastern flank of their entity. They consider this presence a threat to their existence. Hence, Netanyahu’s justifications for the ongoing war, despite the size of the losses, as a decisive war related to the existence of the Jewish entity. Perhaps, this view of the Jews regarding the urgent need to preserve their entity, and not allow the presence of the people of Palestine, neither inside the state nor on its flanks, is what makes America extend a rope to the entity in its war. It has granted the Jews weeks and months to achieve what it aspires to, so perhaps it will succeed in implementing a two-state solution.
Between America’s insistence on the necessity of a two-state solution, and what has begun to be circulated in the corridors of the United Nations, and international trends regarding recognition of the State of Palestine, as happened before in Norway, Sweden, and Ireland on 20 May, 2024, there is no doubt that all this clearly indicates America’s strategy related to the issue of the Jewish entity and Palestine. On the one hand, regarding the Jewish entity, America wants it to be a fully-fledged state, with clear borders, a specific identity, and a specific purpose for its existence, and to be an integral part of the Middle East region that America seeks to create. As for the other state, which is the State of Palestine, there is no doubt that America considers its establishment and legitimization in international organizations, after determining its borders and geographical location, as an end to what has been known as the Palestine issue, since the establishment of the Jewish state on the land of Palestine. This is so that the State of Palestine becomes the state of all Palestinians, whether within the bowels of the Jewish entity, or in countries of displacement such as Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, or on the borders of Gaza and the West Bank, or in countries of migration outside the Arab world. This means that this state must be established as the state of the Palestinians and accepted by the people of Palestine, especially the influential parties such as the Palestinian Authority and the organizations under it, such as Fatah amongst others, as well as the resistance in Gaza and the West Bank, represented by Hamas, al-Jihad and other arms of the resistance, in addition to the general Palestinian public. Consequently, the refugee status of Palestinians in camps in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank and in various parts of the world is canceled.
Do the people of Palestine accept the establishment of the State of Palestine in exchange for full recognition of the Jewish entity’? Until this moment, there is no indication that this solution is not accepted by the people of Palestine, represented by all groups, whether from the resistance or the Palestinian Authority. Instead, all Palestinian factions welcomed the decisions of countries that decided to recognize the State of Palestine, without specifying the borders, identity, and independence of this state.
As for the Jews, they still insist on not accepting the existence of an entity for the Palestinians, in a state called Palestine. It is most likely that the Jews mean by this a state established on the land that the Jewish state has been working to annex by force, and displacing its people from it by force, that is, in Gaza and the West Bank. However, the Jewish entity will not resist the establishment of a Palestinian state in Jordan in its entirety, or in the remaining part of the West Bank, after cutting off the largest part, on which many settlements were built, especially if this land is tightly linked to Jordan, through a federal or confederation. In both cases, the proposed Palestinian state does not have any form of power.
The bottom line is that what America seeks is to confirm the legitimacy of the Jewish entity, and make it an integral part of the new Middle East order. Likewise, it seeks to create an entity for the Palestinians in the form of a state that is capable of absorbing the people of Palestine in refugee camps, thus ending the refugee issue, and the accompanying right to return to the land of Palestine. The demand for return in such a solution will be interpreted, or transformed, to a demand a return to the State of Palestine, that the people of Palestine accepted. This is whether the state was on what remains of the West Bank, or was part of a confederation with Jordan, or was Jordan transformed into an alternative homeland. The two-state solution in this form, one very strong Jewish state and the other state, that is very weak and deprived of will, will be a disaster for the people of Palestine. It will be a disgrace to all Muslims. It will be a disaster worse than the disaster of the occupation itself.
Recognizing a Jewish entity on all of the land of Palestine, or the largest part of it, will be exploited by the Jews, with their known deceit, greed, and fraud. They can then declare that the presence of the Palestinians in the land of “Israel” was not legitimate to begin with, and that the Palestinians were occupiers of the land of “Israel,” which was called Palestine! Such a scenario was proposed by one of the war ministers of the occupying entity, when he claimed that through its annexation of the West Bank, Jordan had occupied West Bank and the Jews had returned, to liberate it from the Jordanian occupation. It is possible that Jews will demand compensation from the Jordanian side and from the Palestinians, represented by their state. This is not far from what the Jews would do.
6- America and the New Middle East Project
America knows very well that the recognition of the Jewish entity by the Arab countries, including Palestine, when it is established, will not provide the entity with a natural stability, amidst countries of Arabic language and race, who believe in Islam, whilst the entity is Jewish in race, religion, and Hebrew in language. There must be a new political order with a geopolitical outlook to enable this. This is what America says and means when Biden declares, “And with this deal, ‘Israel’ could become more deeply integrated into the region, including, it’s no surprise to you all, including a potential historic normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia. ‘Israel’ could be part of a regional security network to counter the threat posed by Iran. All of this progress would make ‘Israel’ more secure.” Building the Middle East region is a strategic goal for America for many reasons. The most important reason is making the Jewish entity part of a political region, in which America works to maintain its own strategic balance. In addition to the Jewish entity, America is working to make Iran and Turkey part of the Middle East region. Each of them has an important role, as suggested from the Baker-Hamilton report, shortly after America’s occupation of Iraq. It revealed an important role for Iran and Turkey within the Middle East order, especially since Iran, since the 1979 revolution, has become isolated in the region, with no link to any region, which constitutes a burden on the leading state in the world, America, in terms of establishing its own policy. Likewise, Türkiye was unable to join the European Union, so it also remained isolated in the region. Hence, America seeks to build a new Middle East in which there will be the Arab countries of Asia and North Africa, in addition to the Jewish entity, Iran, and Turkey. Perhaps the two limited operations, that took place between Iran and the Jewish entity, are only a prelude to making the two states part of the region to be created. This is besides the attempt to include Türkiye in the negotiations taking place between the entity on the one hand, and Hamas on the other. Add to this the importance of strategic balance in the Middle East, which cannot be achieved naturally, as long as there is only one state that possesses nuclear weapons of mass destruction, such as the Jewish entity state. Therefore, America has always sought to provide cover for Iran to possess nuclear capabilities, and has always prevented the Jewish entity from striking nuclear facilities, until Iran possesses nuclear weapons. Then the use of nuclear weapons to extend influence over the region becomes impossible because of the strategic balance. Something similar happened when America enabled Pakistan to obtain nuclear weapons, after India had obtained them.
The point is that America, in its current political actions in the Middle East, is moving the chess pieces, and developing actions, based on a clear vision of the political map for the Middle East. Its map guarantees absolute American hegemony over the region, and excludes the influence of any other country, such as Britain. America worked diligently to achieve its desired hegemony, and worked to untie knots in its path, knot by knot. It expelled British influence from Iran in 1979 CE, created influence in the Republic of Iran, occupied Iraq and removed the long-standing British influence from it. It consolidated its influence in Saudi Arabia, since the arrival of King Fahd and then Salman and his son. It contributed to breaking the strength and fervor of the people in Syria, which had been an insurmountable obstacle to recognizing the Jewish entity, as stated in a report by Kissinger shortly after the 1973 war. It was able to establish military bases in the Gulf States that have strong British influence, and worked to divide Sudan, the country with the largest land mass in the region. It has been working hard to extend its influence in North Africa, and remove British and French influence from it. Untying these knots one by one was necessary and important for building a new Middle Eastern region. Perhaps America began to see that the ongoing war in Gaza would lead to untying of the last knot in the process of building the region, which sheds light on the intense political and military interest in the course of events, day by day and hour by hour. The region has not been devoid of American politicians, even for a single day, since the inception of the war.
7- What’s Next?
Since the beginning of this article, the most important, most sensitive and influential factor in the course of events has not been addressed. It is the factor of Islam as a doctrinal belief rooted in the region, that the peoples of the region believe in, and the hope that Islam will return to being the driver of events, rather than merely reacting to the events. The reason for delaying this important part of the article until the end is that political actions and subsequent military actions, as well as challenges to international plans, cannot be carried out simply because the Arab, Turkish and Iranian peoples believe in this ideology. They cannot be carried out without the ideology of Islam having sole sovereignty over the course of matters and events. This is the ability to address the events on the one hand, whilst developing practical actions and plans on the other hand. The current events in the region, since the destruction of the entity of the Islamic Khilafah (Caliphate) in 1924 CE, until now, are all taking place completely away from the role and ideology of Islam. However, Islamic values, and what results from absolute belief in Allah (swt) and the Islamic Aqeedah, appear clearly and evidently among the members of the Ummah, especially when their horizons become narrowed under trials. This was clearly demonstrated in the Gaza war, with patience that astonished the kuffar, before astonishing the Muslims, and a firm determination, that is unyielding before iron. As for the political aspect, and confronting the plans of America and its agents, the issue is very different. Islam, as a comprehensive belief and comprehensive ideology, has nothing to do with that until this moment. This is even though, under the roaring waves in the region, there is a wave moving strongly and steadily towards the restoration of Islam as an ideology, accompanied by a comprehensive system and a clear method for it to become the fundamental driver of events. This wave is the work for the resumption of the Islamic way of life, and restoration of the political system of the Khilafah, that the Messenger of Allah (saw) left behind as a comprehensive, clear, strong, and influential system, before he (saw) passed on to the Companionship of Allah (swt), the Supreme. He (saw) said,
«تَرَكْتُكُمْ عَلَى الْبَيْضَاءِ لَيْلُهَا كَنَهَارِهَا لَا يَزِيغُ عَنْهَا بَعْدِي إِلَّا هَالِكٌ»
“I left you upon the whiteness of righteousness, its nights are like its days. No one will depart from it after me, except that he is ruined.” He (saw) said,
«وَسَتَكُونُ خُلَفَاءُ فَتَكْثُرُ»
“There will be Khulafa’a (Caliphs) and they will be many,” and he (saw) said,
«ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ»
“Then there will be a Khilafah on the Method of Prophethood.”
The system of Khilafah, that succeeds in authority after the Messenger (saw), which the Muslims followed, starting with Abu Bakr (ra) and ending with the last Khilafah of the Muslims, began to loom on the horizon, once again. Its light shines from among the accumulated darkness. There is no doubt that the emergence of the Second Islamic Khilafah on the Method of the Prophethood will completely turn the scales around. Recognition of the Jewish entity in Palestine will be swept away, and returned to the darkness of the seas. The nationalist borders imposed and established by Britain and France, and rearranged by America, will be completely erased from the map of modern history. Reliance on Western colonialist tools, such as the World Bank amongst others, will become a relic of the past, amongst much, much more. The concern of America and its allies will not be whether the Jewish entity remains or disappears. Instead, their greatest concern will be to prevent the Muslim armies from returning to the jihad of conquests, that was stopped a long time ago. Yet, these tyrants never forgot that.
The return of Islam to ruling and management of the affairs of Muslims, all Muslims, has become a demand for all Muslims after they saw, witnessed, and were afflicted by what befell them during the absence of their powerful entity. By the mercy of Allah (swt), Hizb ut-Tahrir rose up within the Ummah, raising the Rayah banner of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and carrying the banner of the Khilafah on the Method of the Prophethood. It is not harmed by those who let it down, nor is it deterred by the injustice of the rulers, the reluctance of the trembling fearful, and the hesitation of the hypocrites. Instead, it marches blatantly in defiance of injustice, harassment, imprisonment, torture and martyrdom. All that remained of the path the Hizb has traveled upon since 1953 CE is the declaration of the Khilafah on the Method of the Prophethood. I ask Allah (swt) that this will happen soon, and that is not difficult for Allah (swt).
[وَيَمۡكُرُ ٱللَّهُۖ وَٱللَّهُ خَيۡرُ ٱلۡمَٰكِرِينَ]
“And Allah plots, and Allah is the best of planners.” [Al-Anfal:30]
-
Rioting for Rights
News:
Bangladesh crawls back to normalcy after more than a week of violent clashes that killed nearly 200 people. Most of the country remained without internet access, but thousands of cars were on the streets of the capital Dhaka after authorities relaxed a curfew for seven hours. (Independent.co.uk)
Comment:
The recent clashes in Bangladesh may seem to have come to an end but the actual deep rooted disease is still there and will certainly cause a relapse sooner or later. The Quota system was introduced by the British and was a means of luring the poor and needy people to do what they doubted or even taking the society in a certain direction like job quotas for women, which worked well to attract women to get out of their homes and help the country with their earnings. India, Pakistan and later on Bangladesh designed and applied their own quota systems according to the will of the Government. Bangladesh reserved 56% of seats in quota, of which 30% are for the children and grandchildren of the freedom fighters. Now these freedom fighters are the people who fought against the forces of West Pakistan. So one can say it is a reward of loyalty to the existing State of Bangladesh. Ironically these freedom fighters are the people who fought against the State of that time, East and West Pakistan combined.
Students’ demand of removing the quota for the freedom fighters was dealt poorly by the Premier, Haseena Wajid, who while addressing their demands mockingly commented as “Who should we keep the quota for”? Razakars? These were the volunteers who fought against the people of East Pakistan in 1971, that itself was a tragedy we shy away from. Maimun bin Siyah asked Anas bin Malik: “O Abu Hamzah, what makes the blood and wealth of a Muslim forbidden?” He said: “مَنْ شَهِدَ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَقْبَلَ قِبْلَتَنَا وَصَلَّى صَلاَتَنَا وَأَكَلَ ذَبِيحَتَنَا فَهُوَ مُسْلِمٌ لَهُ مَا لِلْمُسْلِمِينَ وَعَلَيْهِ مَا عَلَى الْمُسْلِمِينَ””Whoever bears witness to La ilaha illallah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah) and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah [SAW], faces our Qiblah, prays as we pray, and eats our slaughtered animals, he is a Muslim, and has the same rights and obligations as the Muslims.” (Sunan an-Nasa’i 3968)
The hadith above clearly states the recognition and sanctity of a Muslm, and no other can better recognise it than another Muslim. When Allah and his messengers have forbidden something for us then how can our Governments use our people against each other. No ruler of the Muslims has the right to order the killings of its young men and training and paying other young men for that. And the young men need to understand that their fight is against the ugly system left by the colonisers, and followed by their existing puppets in power. It’s been 75 years after the creation of Pakistan that Muslims of the Subcontinent have been fighting the invisible enemy within.
It was the emergence of the East India Company that destroyed the unity of the people of the subcontinent by removing the harmony among them and replacing it with greed and benefit. Thus Bengal, which was a major production hub, fell prey to the East India Company. The rulers like Siraj ud Daula fought fearlessly against the British and embraced martyrdom and then were replaced by the rulers like Haseena Wajid, with the help of traitors like Mir Jafar. People of Bangladesh have suffered enough. Bengal famine, Rohingya crisis, bloody separation from West Pakistan, and now being under constant oppression. This deterioration will be reversed once the Ummah gets rid of the traitors ruling on them and Khilafah on the method of Prophethood is established, that will take care of the affairs of Muslim Ummah and will remove the weeds like Haseena from the fertile land of the East as well as rest of the world. Quota system is a small fraction of their crime and brought the people of Bengal on roads. A State that once was glorious shall be glorified again by the light of Islam and the youth instead of fighting each other in the streets will be opening the doors of the world to Islam through Jihad. To reach this level of glory, Muslim youth must stand united in the face of oppression and work for the establishment of Khilafah that shall become their saviour in both worlds.
[يَسۡتَبۡشِرُونَ بِنِعۡمَةٖ مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَفَضۡلٖ وَأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُضِيعُ أَجۡرَ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ]
“They receive good tidings of favour from Allah and bounty and [of the fact] that Allah does not allow the reward of believers to be lost” [Aali Imran: 171]
Ikhlaq Jehan
-
The Mali-Niger-Burkina Faso Tripartite Union
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Mali-Niger-Burkina Faso Tripartite Union
(Translated)Question:
On Saturday, 6 July 2024, the leaders of the military juntas of Burkina Faso, Niger and Mali announced at a summit in Niamey, the capital of Niger, that they had signed a confederation agreement. Is there an international force behind this announcement? If so, who is the country to which they show their loyalty? Or is this confederation established on their own accord? Thank you very much.
Answer:
To clarify the answer, we review the following matters:
1- These three countries, after the coups that took place in them between 2020-2023, have become loyal to America and obey its command! We explained it in the answers to the questions: 1/9/2020 regarding the Malian coup led by Assimi Goita, 7/2/2023 regarding the Burkina Faso coup led by Ibrahim Traoré, and 15/8/2023 regarding the Niger coup led by Abderrahmane Tchiani… and the three regions are Islamic countries:
a- As for Mali: it is an Islamic country. Islam reached it in the eleventh century, and the dominant religion in Mali is still Islam. About 90% of Malians are Muslims, about 5% are Christians, and about 5% are other religions… and the capital is Bamako.
b- As for Burkina Faso: it is a country in West Africa, and it is an Islamic country. According to the 2006 census, more than 60.5% of its population are Muslims, and about 23% are Christians, and then other traditions. Its area is 274,200 km2, its population is 21,510,181 people, and it depends on agriculture for its economy. The city of Ouagadougou is considered the most important city in the country and is the capital.
c- As for Niger: it is located in West Africa and was given the name Niger in reference to the Niger River that runs through its territory. It is bordered to the south by Nigeria and Benin, to the west by Burkina Faso and Mali, to the north by Algeria and Libya, while it is bordered by Chad to the east. Niger’s total area is about 1,270,000 square km. Niger is an Islamic country. Islam is the religion of the vast majority in Niger, amounting to more than 99.3%. Islam spread into what is now Niger in the 15th century through the expansion of both the Songhai Sultanate in the west and the influence of trans-Saharan trade from the Maghreb and Egypt. The capital is Niamey.
Thus, the coups that took place in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso between 2020 and 2023 were pro-American and supported by it.
2- On 16/9/2023, the three countries established the “Coalition of Sahel States” in order to create a joint defense force against the potential threat of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) military intervention in Niger: (The Malian president, Colonel Assimi Goita, and the Nigerian president, General Abderrahmane Tchiani And the Burkinabe, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, had signed, in September 2023, a charter, about which the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mali, Abdullah Diop, said in a statement at the time: “It will be a combination of military and economic efforts between the three countries”.
The joint charter signed by the leaders of Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, on 16/9/2023, stipulates the formation of the “Coalition of Sahel States.” The charter establishing the coalition consists of 17 articles, the first article stipulates that it will be called the Liptako-Gourma Charter, and that “the contracting parties agreed among themselves to establish the Alliance of Sahel States, abbreviated as “AES”. While the second article stipulates that the goal of this charter is “establishing an architecture of collective defense and mutual support.” The founding charter also stipulates in its Article 6: “Any attack on the sovereignty and territorial integrity of one or more contracted parties will be considered an aggression against the other parties, which entails an obligation to mutual assistance, including the use of armed force to restore security.” Article 11 of the Charter stipulates: “The alliance is open to the membership of any other State that shares the same geographical, political and socio-cultural realities and accepts the goals of the alliance.” (Al Jazeera Center for Studies 25/6/2024).
It is clear from Articles 6 and 11 of this alliance formed by these three countries that the purpose of its establishment is to confront possible foreign military intervention, especially French, through the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and to stand militarily with one of them in the event that it is subjected to a French external military strike. The other goal is to create a division within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), as understood from the eleven articles, and to encourage the countries falling under this group to join this alliance.
3- On 6/7/2024, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso announced the establishment of a confederation. The confederation agreement signed between these three countries on 6/7/2024 in Niamey, the capital of Niger, complements the Sahel Alliance agreement signed at the first meeting. (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, located in the African Sahel region, announced today, Saturday, their unification within a “confederation.” The three countries said, in a final statement during their first summit on Saturday in the Nigerien capital, Niamey, that their presidents “decided to cross an additional stage towards a deeper integration between Member States. For this purpose, they adopted a treaty establishing a confederation between Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger under the name of the Confederation of Sahel States. (UAE’s Al-Ittihad 6/7/2024).
4- Despite the absence of direct American statements, all indicators show that America is behind the establishment of these countries of the “Confederation of Sahel States” and that, “on the one hand, it wants it to be a fortress that protects its agents in these countries from the sanctions of the ECOWAS group, especially since the three countries are landlocked and lack any access to the sea, hindering their trade. And on the other hand, it wants this to be a counter alliance to ECOWAS, which is controlled by France and Britain. Indeed, the establishment of the confederation created a storm of criticism for it within the ECOWAS group, and it began to demand reform, and this was evident in the statements of the Senegalese president, meaning that the transfer of countries from ECOWAS towards the “confederation.” became possible.
5- Therefore, this confederation is not spontaneous, but was created by America between these three countries loyal to it in order to preserve its colonies and to prevent the intervention of Europe, especially France, and the return to its colonies. The steps that these countries took before the union confirm this, including:
A- Burkina Faso and Niger announced their withdrawal from the G5 Sahel task force in November 2023. Mali also withdrew from the G5 Sahel task force in May 2022. (Burkina Faso and Niger announced, on Saturday, their withdrawal from the G5 Sahel group, a year and a half after Mali’s withdrawal from the African group. According to a joint statement by the governments of Burkina Faso and Niger, published by the official Burkina Faso news agency, “the decision is sovereign, and comes after an in-depth evaluation of the group and its work.” The statement added: “The G5 in the Sahel cannot serve foreign interests at the expense of the interests of the peoples of the Sahel, let alone accept the dictates of any force, whatever it may be, in the name of a misleading and childish partnership that denies the right to sovereignty of our peoples and countries. Therefore, Burkina Faso and Niger have clearly shouldered the historical responsibility of withdrawing from this organization…” (Anadolu Agency, 3/12/2023). (The military junta in Mali announced in a statement on Sunday, the country’s withdrawal from a multinational military force in the Sahel region of West Africa, which was formed to fight jihadists in 2014. The military junta justified the withdrawal decision by not allowing Mali to chair the G5 Sahel group, as Bamako was supposed to host in February 2022 a conference of the leaders of this group. The countries, namely Mauritania, Chad, Burkina Faso and Niger, under the pretext of internal instability in Mali, which witnessed a military coup in which the military junta seized power. (France 24, 16/5/2022).
B- Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso announced their withdrawal from ECOWAS in January 2024 in order to get rid of France’s influence and not allow it to intervene militarily under the pretext of combating terrorism. (Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger decided, on Sunday, to withdraw from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). This was stated in a joint statement issued by the three Sahel countries, which are led by military juntas and interim transitional governments. The statement stated that the three countries will withdraw from ECOWAS which consists of 15 members “as soon as possible.” it added that ECOWAS, which is accused of “being subjected to the influence of foreign powers” and “betraying its principles”, constitutes a “threat” to the three countries… (Anadolu Agency, 28/1/2024)
6- All this indicates that these three countries have withdrawn from all organizations subject to the influence and direction of France in order to get rid of French influence. It is unlikely that these countries would withdraw on their own without American support, or even an American order, as a prelude to the establishment of the confederation that America wanted to tear apart ECOWAS or weaken it and then shake or replace French influence in those three important countries whose total population exceeds 70 million people and which have influential resources for energy and minerals, which were exploited by French companies! This “confederation” and the tone of its leaders threaten to remove more countries from the French sphere of influence in the Sahel region, and these are very fragile governments due to French colonial plunder and the extreme poverty it left behind and due to the severity of the rampant corruption among the rulers, and these new circumstances tempt the military who are in contact with America through calls for “fighting terrorism” and military training and support. In general, it can be said that the intransigence of the leaders of the three countries against France is considered the greatest threat facing France’s influence after it had been safe and stable for decades.
7- Thus, it becomes clear that the rulers of Islamic countries transfer the country’s dependence from one colonizer to another, so they turn their backs on France, which plundered the Muslims’ wealth, and turn to America to also plunder those goods, while the Muslims remain in distress and poverty, as if the Muslims are incapable of ruling their country. If this situation includes all Muslim countries, yet in African countries, it is more intense and deeper, and the more Muslims become aware of their Deen and the more certain they are that adhering to it is the path to their salvation in this world and the hereafter, the Muslims become closer to what pleases Allah (swt), and their hatred for the kuffar colonialist who plundered and plunders the resources of their country, increases, leaving them suffering from poverty and destitution, and increasing the determination and work of Muslims to establish their Deen and resume their Islamic life through the establishment of the Islamic state that unites Muslims, the second Khilafah Rashidah (rightly guided Caliphate) State on the method of the Prophethood, after this oppressive rule in which Muslims live. We are reassured, Allah willing, when we see that Muslims have had enough, and they are now one step away from building the Islamic state, unifying the Islamic countries, and expelling all the kaffir colonial countries from their countries, and even bringing guidance to those countries, that is not difficult to Allah to accomplish. He (saw) says in the Hadith narrated by Ahmad on the authority of Hudhayfah, may Allah be pleased with him:
«…ثُمَّ تَكُونُ مُلْكاً جَبْرِيَّةً فَتَكُونُ مَا شَاءَ اللهُ أَنْ تَكُونَ ثُمَّ يَرْفَعُهَا إِذَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَرْفَعَهَا ثُمَّ تَكُونُ خِلَافَةً عَلَى مِنْهَاجِ النُّبُوَّةِ ثُمَّ سَكَتَ»
“…then there will be oppressive rule (ملكًا جبرية) for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method.’ Then he (saw) was silent.”
18 Muharram Al Haram 1446 AH
24/7/2024 CE -
The Truth of the Petrodollar Agreement
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
The Truth of the Petrodollar Agreement
(Translated)Question:
Al-Hurra website published, 18/6/2024: (Recently, news sites have widely circulated reports talking about a Saudi-American Agreement in 1974, under which Saudi Arabia would use the dollar in all its oil sales. According to those reports, this agreement and its duration of 50 years, is now over… but the Leader Insight website refuted those reports, stressing, “There is no such agreement”). I would like clarity on the truth of this agreement, if it exists, and the role of oil in maintaining the dominance of the dollar. And will the BRICS bloc affect the dominance of the dollar in the future?
Answer:
In order to clarify the answers to the above questions, we review the following matters:
First: In terms of the news circulating about the expiration of the term of the Saudi-American Agreement to limit the sale of oil to dollars, the social media sites are swarming with the news, but no official statement from the two countries spoke about this, as if they deliberately left it ambiguous! As for the media, they refrained from circulating it at first, then some started talking about it due to the large amount of talk about it. For example, the Russian RT website, published on 15/6/2024 (Olga Samofalova wrote in Vzglyad: “The petrodollar agreement between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United States, which was signed in 1974, has expired. This allows Saudi Arabia to sell its oil and other products not only in US dollars, but also in other currencies, as the media confirms). This is an unofficial confirmation from a Russian media source about the existence of such an agreement.
Second: However American media sources deny this matter:
1- What was stated in the question on the Al-Hurra website, 18/6/2024: (…According to those reports, this agreement, which lasted 50 years, has now ended, which heralds the end of the dominance of the American currency. But the Leader Insight website refuted the reports, on Monday, confirming: “there is no such agreement”).
2- Morning Star Newspaper, 17/6/2024, addressed the stories spreading across social media sites about the collapse of the long-term petrodollar agreement between America and Saudi Arabia, and said, “This agreement never existed”.
3- In a blog post on Friday, Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS Global Wealth Management, noted that [the fake “petrodollar deal” story has become surprisingly widespread, providing another lesson about the dangers of “confirmation bias.” (Morning Star, 17/6/2024)].
Third: However, neither side officially commented on the recent articles stating that the petrodollar agreement concluded between the United States and Saudi Arabia in 1974 had expired on 9/6/2024. Neither side officially commented in denial or confirmation, but rather the comments were from other media sources or something similar! As we showed above, there are other signs through which it is likely that there is an agreement in this regard between America and Saudi Arabia, and these signs include the following:
1- It was stated in the report of the Comptroller General in America issued in 1978 entitled “The American-Saudi Committee for Economic Cooperation”: (The Comptroller General recommends strengthening the work of the Saudi-American Committee for Economic Cooperation, which was established in June 1974, and opening an office for the US Department of the Treasury in Riyadh to “recycle petrodollar”). The report confirms in its introduction the establishment of this joint committee.
2- After Paul Donovan said in his blog post that [“It is clear that the story of the “petrodollar agreement” that is circulating today is fake news,” he added, “Perhaps the closest thing to a petrodollar deal was the secret agreement between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that was reached in late 1974, which promised to provide aid and military equipment in exchange for the Kingdom investing billions of dollars from the proceeds of the sale of oil in the US Treasury” (Morning Star, 17/6/2024)].
3- After the Morning Star Newspaper reported, on 17/6/2024, that the petrodollar agreement between America and Saudi Arabia, “this agreement never existed,” it said, “Based on a report published by the American Accounting Office, the matter relates to a joint American-Saudi committee that was established to enhance the economic cooperation between the two countries and the decision to establish it was signed on 8/6/1974 between US Secretary of State Kissinger and the Saudi Crown Prince at the time, Fahd bin Abdulaziz”.
4- On 20/10/2020, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Qabas published in its “News Archive” a news item that it had published in the June 7, 1974 issue, in which it stated the following: (President Nixon discussed today with Prince Fahd bin Abdulaziz, Second Deputy Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia and Minister of Interior discussed the possibilities of achieving lasting peace in the Middle East in the wake of the agreements to separate forces on the Egyptian and Syrian fronts with ‘Israel’. They also discussed ways to expand economic, industrial and defense cooperation between the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United States. Their talks took place in President Nixon’s office in the White House before a luncheon held by the American President at the White House in honor of his guest, who arrived here yesterday for a three-day visit. He stated that prince Fahd seeks to increase American military assistance to his country in exchange for continued Saudi cooperation in supplying the United States with oil).
5- businesstimes.com.sg reported on 18/6/2024: [On 8/6/1974, the American newspaper, The New York Times reported, on its front page: (Secretary of State Kissinger and Prince Fahd Ibn Abdel Aziz, Second Deputy Premier of Saudi Arabia and a half‐brother of King Faisal, signed the six‐page agreement at Blair House across the street from the White House this morning.)].
Fourth: Taking a closer look at the third point above, especially US President Nixon’s reception of Fahd bin Abdulaziz, indicates the great importance of that visit. As well as, the establishment of the American-Saudi Committee for Economic Cooperation on 8/6/1974, which is referred to by official sources, including the report of the American Comptroller General, indicates that there were agreements that were concluded as if this committee was in charge of their implementation, and all of this confirms the existence of an agreement between America and Saudi Arabia, whether it was written and kept secret or were binding and unwritten understandings. Even such understandings between a small agent state and the most powerful state, America, are completely binding on the agent, they do not deviate from it even if it is not written.
All of the above facts support what we believe is the reality of the existence of this agreement or petrodollar understanding, even though this remains secret and is not recognized by official circles, but they do not deny it either.
Fifth: What confirms or suggests this is America’s interest in making the dollar the international currency of the world, this is how:
1- Since the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944, which set the price of an ounce of gold at $35, the dollar has become at the highest level of the global monetary system. The same as gold, but because of America’s colonial projects, especially the Vietnam War, and the exorbitant spending on the war, the United States has printed more dollars more that what can be exchanged for gold. By the late 1960s, the number of dollars in circulation had increased, and there were more dollars in the world than gold. This encouraged foreign countries to demand gold in exchange for their dollars, which led to the depletion of American gold supplies. The US gold reserve decreased from 574 million ounces at the end of World War II to about 261 million ounces in 1971. Then US President Richard Nixon abolished the gold standard on 15/8/1971, thus completely separating the dollar from gold, in what was known as the ‘Nixon Shock’.
2- However, this separation between the dollar and gold created a political and financial problem for America, which is that countries in the world no longer have any motive to obtain dollars, and this made America look for other means that push countries to increase the demand for the dollar, thus preserving the dollar’s global status. America found the answer in the world’s urgent need for energy and therefore the main source of energy represented by oil, of which Saudi Arabia was the largest producer at the time.
3- The Nixon administration dealt with this through discussions with Saudi Arabia from 1972 to 1974 to establish the petrodollar, and then the agreement that stipulated that the United States would provide a security guarantee to the Saudi regime, and in return Saudi Arabia, the largest oil producer in the world, which possesses the largest reserves oil revenues in the world, by selling its oil in dollars, and Saudi Arabia also agreed to recycle billions of US dollars from its oil revenues into US treasury bonds.
4- Before this agreement, Saudi Arabia used to deal in British pounds in exchange for oil, due to the influence of British agents in ruling Saudi Arabia at that time. When this agreement was concluded on 8 June 1974 between Secretary of State Kissinger and Prince Fahd bin Abdulaziz, it was a prelude to dealing in dollars with Saudi Arabia instead of sterling as the price of oil.
After that, prince Fahd rose to prominence and became crown prince in 1975, during the reign of his brother, King Khalid. He had most of the powers during the reign of his brother, King Khalid, and he continued to do so until King Khaled’s death and he became king on June 13, 1982. He was known for his loyalty to America.
Thus, Saudi Arabia’s dealings with the price of oil were limited to dollars starting from the beginning of 1975, as sources state that after 1974, Saudi Arabia’s sale of oil was limited to US dollars, and this also included OPEC to oil-producing countries, and it became mandatory for every country that needed to buy oil to have a sufficient amount of dollar currency, which was the only currency used in oil transactions, which means that these countries must accept loans in dollars or buy dollars from financial markets, or by any other means. The important thing is that America guaranteed the continued flow of the dollar, and the Federal Reserve Bank guaranteed the continued production of the dollar… especially since the Saudi riyal is linked to the dollar, and therefore there is an incentive for Saudi Arabia to commit to the US dollar to maintain economic stability. [“Saudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih confirmed that the US dollar will remain the approved currency for sales and trade of his country’s crude oil abroad…” (Anadolu 9/4/2019)].
Sixth: If Saudi Arabia’s accession to the BRICS bloc led by China and Russia, who are America’s opponents, affects Saudi Arabia’s continued restriction of the pricing of its oil in dollars, then this issue is affected by other factors. To clarify this, we review the following:
1- The term BRICS is used to refer to the economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Brazil, Russia, India and China formed the BRIC group in 2006 in order to give developing countries a greater role in international affairs. In 2011, the group’s name was changed to BRICS with the addition of South Africa. It was announced that Saudi Arabia, along with Egypt, the Emirates, Iran, Ethiopia, and Argentina, would be included in BRICS at the G15 Summit, which was concluded on 24 August 2023 in Johannesburg, the capital of South Africa. These countries would join at the beginning of 2024. One of the goals of this summit was to try to get rid of the dominance of the dollar and issue a currency for the BRICS members, but these countries did not agree on that. It sought to encourage dealing in its local currencies among them. That is why it worked to invite Saudi Arabia, the largest oil exporter, to the group. It is worth noting that despite the official Sauditelevision announcement on 2 January 2024 that Saudi Arabia had joined the BRICS, Saudi Trade Minister Majid Al-Qasabi said in a panel discussion on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland: [“Saudi Arabia received an invitation to join BRICS, but we did not join officially yet.” (Sky News Arabic 16/1/2024)]. This means that Saudi Arabia was waiting for America’s approval to join BRICS so that its accession would be in America’s interests.
2- The entry of countries affiliated with America, such as Saudi Arabia, into the BRICS group makes this group fragile, and we have seen South Africa’s opposition to issuing a currency for the BRICS. There are no independent countries in the BRICS group except Russia and China, and the rest are agents of the West, especially America. But Russia and China want to appear as if they were able to confront the West and form a counter front, and they always talk about a multipolar world. When America allows Saudi Arabia and other of its agents to enter BRICS, it is in order to influence it from within, just as it previously encouraged its Eastern European affiliated countries to enter the European Union in 2004 to influence it through these countries. Through Poland, which entered the union, it was able to obstruct the drafting of a constitution for it to strengthen its political power and bring it closer to a quasi-federal state, keeping it a fragile union that is vulnerable to fracture and collapse. This is what happened when it tasked Saudi Arabia, which is the largest producer in OPEC and has a strong influence on it, with actively using the necessary methods to create an alliance of some kind between OPEC and Russia to control Russia’s production within OPEC’s limits, in coordination between Saudi Arabia and Russia.
3- And Putin, whose country is a founding member of the group, who is very enthusiastic about issuing a currency for the group, has surrendered to the political reality of the member states and said: “Continuing to expand BRICS would activate the role of the bloc at the international level, and the issue of adopting a unified currency is still complex and needs more discussions.” (Al Jazeera, 24/8/023). Al Jazeera had previously published on 23/8/2023: (The issue of the unified currency of the BRICS group was not formally raised during the summit due to the lack of agreement among the five members and the existence of discrepancies between them… Putin called in a speech via video directed to the group to expand dealing in local currencies…) Thus, Russia did not succeed in finding an alternative currency to the dollar, which is what it wanted to achieve from BRICS.
Seventh: As long as currency is paper, it has no intrinsic value, and the economic problems, economic speculation, political disputes, and even colonial domination will exist. Islam, through the Revelation of Allah (swt), gold and silver were made the basis of money, that is, a material that carries intrinsic value. The Messenger (saw) made gold and silver the currency, and he (saw) made them alone the monetary standard to which goods and efforts are measured, as proven in authentic Hadiths. But the colonizers, using the methods of economic colonialism and financial colonialism, used currency as a means of colonialism, so they converted currency to other systems that were not based on gold or silver, and thus giving rise to these problems. These problems cannot go away unless the Islamic state is established and returns money to gold and silver, whether they are used in circulation, or there is paper money in circulation replacing gold and silver and replacing them at all times. This is the Shariah of Allah (swt) that He revealed with His Knowledge,
[أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ]
“Does He who created not know, while He is the Subtle, the Aware?” [Al-Mulk: 14]
1 Muharram 1446 AH
7/7/2024 CE
