| November 2004 / Guest Editorial – Abu Dharr | |||||||||
![]()
|
|||||||||
The
importance of recognising and identifying the enemies of Islam and Muslims
That the Islamic movement has venomous and ruthless enemies appears to be among the most difficult lessons for Muslims to learn. In all the Islamic movement literature that we are familiar with, from that of the docile tablighis to that of the revolutionary jihadis, we have never seen a book (or even a booklet) called “Know Your Enemy”. That unfortunate but inescapable reality is that Muslims have numerous enemies, both working together and competing to be the most effective in attacking us. The antagonism and revulsion now seen towards the Islamic movement (which is basically the attempts of Muslims to implement Islam) have become the headlines of newspapers, the talking-points of commentaries, and the breaking news of our times. And still large parts of the Muslim Ummah carry on as if the world around is friendly, congenial and – in the particularly fabulous fantasies of some day-dreamers – “sympathetic” to Islam and Muslims. This maladroit inability to recognize and publicize our obvious enemies is perhaps the most disabling shortcoming in all the programmes of the Islamic movement. Not
so with Islamic Iran; or at least not until recently. Imam Khomeini
and his followers were never too shy or apprehensive to call an enemy
an enemy. But who is this enemy, and how can he be identified? And the
answer is simple. Imam Khomeini – as is the case with the Islamic movement
in the world at large – stood for freedom from imperialism, liberation
from zionism, and
the independence of thought and action of Muslims and oppressed peoples
everywhere. He took this position a step forward by rallying the Muslims
in Iran around these Islamic principles, and then by ending the rule
of self-defeatism represented by the Shah and his underlings, by terminating
American intrusion in the affairs of Muslims in Iran, and ultimately
by expelling Israel and its agents, who provided a crucial element in
the relationship between the Shah’s regime and the US. Imam Khomeini
and the clear-sighted Muslims around him did not send their military
on a mission to conquer It
was at this point that the enemies emerged and began to reveal their
true colors; and it was at this point that
Imam Khomeini did not hesitate to stand firm and identify those enemies
in clear, unequivocal terms: the governments of the the United States and the Soviet Union, the Ba’athists and Saddam, the munafiqeen
inside Iran, those who opposed the Islamic Revolution and Islamic State,
and Israel. This is a long and daunting list of enemies, but it is also
a true expression of the reality Islamic Iran faced.
With several enemies to confront, it is not wise to launch into
war with all of them; the war must be against those who pose the most
immediate threat. For And yet, even then, there were constant whisperings of doubt from diplomats, obfuscation from opportunists, even murmurs from committed “revolutionaries” asking ‘is there any end to this senseless war? The Iranians are out of their minds sending ‘children’ to the warfront’ ; and mata nasr Allah? – when shall God’s victory come? At that time no one could understand the mystical dimension of this pursuit of justice, but as the years went by the answer began to unfold. There were two attitudes in Islamic Iran to the enemy. One attitude was that of the late Imam and the fearless and death-conquering mujahideen, many of whom achieved shahada (martyrdom); the other attitude was that of quietist scholars, careerist diplomats, and the ever-present holier-than-thou traditionalists. (The last of whom are the most formidable obstacle of the three; we will have more to say about them in future, insha’Allah.) There was no decisive victory at the warfront because a large infusion of disingenuousness had permeated the decision-making body in Islamic Iran, from the lower ranks of government to the highest places in the religious institutions. At the same time that Imam Khomeini was saying, in effect, that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia formed a core of enmity towards the Muslims and the oppressed, others inside Iran’s governmental departments, religious circles and commercial interests refused to accept that to be the case. They did not say so at the time; but now they feel it is safe to express themselves, and they say such things as: “Khomeini miscalculated”; or “Khomeini made mistakes”, or even “Khomeini was a disaster”! These are the same people who just a decade and a half ago were beating their chests and acclaiming the Imam. Today you look at them and they are “revolutionary ghosts.” These were the zealous followers of the Imam; now they have joined the elitists. They are content with paper-shuffling jobs, and some of them have filed their “revolutionary” pasts as a history to be recalled occasionally perhaps, but certainly not repeated. To them, Imam Khomeini’s days were a close call. And their behavior speaks volumes; they are no longer to be found at public gatherings; they are satisfied with an abridged ‘Shi’i’ version of Islam, one that throws off the ‘idealistic’ and ‘impractical’ issue of Islamic unity and the impossible identification with the affairs of the oppressed. Allah’s
victory comes at a high price. Many people were not willing to pay it.
So victory was suspended at the warfront a decade
and a half ago. To drive the point home, Saudi Arabia, the United
States and (embedded in them) Israel – clearly identified as enemies
in Imam Khomeini’s dictionary – have become numbers in the diplomatic
directories of those who began this whole process by clamoring
for a ‘dialogue of civilizations.’ You can almost hear them in Where is Islam in all this? Where are the Islamic principles for which Islamic Iran and the ‘Khomeini generation’ gave their precious sons, their best and brightest? We, the sons of the Islamic movement, are like a family. Some of us turn out to be obedient and others stray from the principles we hold. The weak and rebellious among us are those who railed against Saudi Arabia, the US and Israel yesterday, yet today are buddy-buddy with the Saudis, so-so with the Americans, and “can’t figure it out” with the Israelis. The temptations to deviate are obvious; our enemies offer attractive and seductive faces alongside their hostile ones, and tempt with promises of sweet rewards, even as they also issue dire threats. Many of their inducements and sweet words are proffered by Muslims who, however sincerely, are in effect working for our enemies rather than for Islam and Muslims. The oppressed of the world have little to offer but the promise of righteous struggles ahead, which can look very like problems and troubles to those whose eyes are clouded by pragmatism and dazzled by the mirages offered by our enemies. But
Muslims and Islamic movements of the world: take heed. You cannot have
an enemy and a friend in the same entity at the same time. It is either
your enemy or your friend. And if you cannot distinguish an enemy from
a friend, how can you expect Allah to grant you victory? Abu
Dharr. |
|||||||||