|
View
Point Abidullah
Jan Bush the Blessing
A spiritual mentor of Bush, Commerce Secretary Don Evans, told CNN that Bush is "able to make these very, very difficult decisions because of his deep faith."[3] (3) His behaviour may seem bizarre to his victims. But it is not. Confronting the obvious, Pharaoh refused to change his ways. So has Bush. Like Pharaoh, Bush is so invested in denial of reality that nothing could change him. This behaviour is for a purpose - a purpose, Bush believes he is defeating. He does not know that his few years "crusade" will clearly produce results far beyond the capacity and expectation of present day Muslims. Bush believes, the Islamic world is allied against God and faces annihilation in the last days.[4] (4) Helplessness of both Muslims and non-Muslims before the US is touching its extreme. Acquaintances of Bush are right when they say: "Bush is God's man at this hour" - words of a top White House aide to a religious publication. Ralph Reed, the former director of the Christian Coalition, says his fellow evangelicals believe God selected Bush because "He knew Bush had the ability to lead in this compelling way." Rudolph Giuliani, a devout Catholic, announced: "there was some divine guidance in the President being elected."[5] (5) Bush also has a different feeling. During his presidential campaign, he said he had been "called" to seek higher office for a divine mission.[6] (6) His campaign remark that Jesus Christ was his "favourite political philosopher" was an early signal.[7] (7) After Sept. 11, Bush said: "We're meeting those challenges because of our faith." Fully determined to begin a divine mission with invasion of Iraq, Bush and his compatriot crusaders had to flee the protests of their own peoples to an inaccessible retreat in the Azores - an island chain originally settled by a Portuguese Crusader whose goal was to encircle the Muslim world with Christian armies. In his State of the Union address, Bush quoted an evangelical hymn that refers to the power of Christ. Evangelicals support Israel because they want to hasten the Second Coming of Jesus. Evangelical support rests on God's biblical promise to give the land of Israel to the Jews forever, and on God's statement that he will "bless those who bless the Jews and curse those who curse the Jews." Sharon thus appears on the scene as Bush's partner in paving the way for establishing Khilafah. It must not be disappointing to observe that Bush has failed to see the moral ambiguity and complexity in the Palestinian-Israeli issue. Sharon represents the key to the coming "salvation." The Evangelicals adore him. Sharon has said often he wants to reclaim the land of ancient Israel. He believes the Palestinians have a homeland - called Jordan. He does not want peace with the Palestinians, and he does not want any of the Muslim countries to remain a threat to Israel. Sharon, Bush and Falwell have formed a partnership based on biblical prophecies, and the Sharon's vision of the resurrection of the ancient Hebrew Kingdom. That is why George Bush makes no effort to stop Ariel Sharon's furious attempt to drive the Palestinians from the occupied territories,[8] (8) and that's why as one senior British official put it: "Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran."[9] (9) The recently launched Arab holocaust was long in the making. Our self-proclaimed "moderate" brothers, however, thought Bush will not attack Iraq. Now they are under the illusion that the war would be limited to Iraq and that "fundamentalists" are prophecy aficionados. To many "moderates," having faith in the words of Allah and his Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) may be equivalent to embracing "fundamentalist theology" as a reaction to military defeat. However, so was reaction of those who stood by Pharaoh! Bush is neck deep in innocent blood - still innocent and benign. Muslims are victims. Yet, opportunist "moderates," such as Hussein Haqqani, love to dismiss the words of Allah and Prophet Muhammad, and calculate an imaginary number of Muslims, who, IF commit themselves to "uncompromising theology," would make "a one million strong recruitment pool for Islamic militancy and terrorism."[10] (10) Muslims have yet to act. Whereas Bush is on his way to implement his idea to "go to Baghdad." This idea is rooted in the desire to serve Jerusalem (Israel) and remake the Middle East. Joe Klein writing in Time Magazine's Feb 10, 2003 edition is more direct in implicating certain political forces. He writes, "A stronger Israel is very much embedded in the rationale for war with Iraq. It is part of the argument that dare not speak its name, a fantasy quietly cherished by the neo-conservative faction in the Bush [Administration]...." The Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Perle coterie evidently has faith that the United States can turn Iraq into a showcase of stable, flourishing, pro-US "democracy." The sheer preposterousness of this expectation suggests that it is fuelled more by quasi-religious zealotry than by logic and evidence. Whatever else Bush's adventure may be, it certainly is not to end up in a success story waiting to be told by American crusaders. Indeed, given the deep resentment - of US and its despotic deputies - among Muslim masses, installing pro-US dummies would never be viable under any label of acceptable government except what is predicted 1400 years ago by the Prophet of Islam - the establishment of Khilafah - nothing in its history suggests otherwise. Part - 2 Resistance to the Bush's adventures would not be limited to the Muslim world alone. It is wrong to assume that he would continue to drag the American people down the path of perpetual war for perpetual against "evil." The defeat of unconstitutional ways to pass war resolution from Congress would follow the economic consequences and alienation on the world stage. By the time the Bush administration's crusade for global domination come to an end, Khilafah would be an undeniable reality. This forceful change of regime in the name of God by a foreign military power will be a new reality in the modern Middle East. A look at the Muslim countries in the region suggests that the impact of US adventure, and the adventure itself, would not be limited to Iraq alone. A quick assessment of the Muslim world presents the following picture in this regard: Jordan Jordan is already suffering from the current intifada in Gaza and the West Bank, a situation intensified by the country's own high Palestinian population and its strong historic ties with the West Bank. The economy is faltering and social unrest due to its regimes' alliance with Israel and US is being felt across the country, especially in the refugee camps. The rise in influence of Hamas and other Islamic groups is worrying pro-US officials. The Palestinians and some East Jordanians have always shown sympathy with the Iraqi regime for its backing for the intifada and its economic support of Jordan. Besides the economic shock, the influx of refugees from Iraq will further shake roots of the regime. Some 80,000 Iraqis from the 400,000 refugees of the Gulf War 1 are still in Jordan. The next wave of refugees will have a majority of those who are running away from Iraq with the intention to settle scores with US and Israel in the first available opportunity. Meanwhile, if Sharon's plan of a massive transfer of Palestinians from the West Bank becomes real, that situation would be a catastrophe for the shaky pro-US regime. The voice of true believers will be louder than ever. Their spirits would be in the ascendant from now on. No amount of economic aid would save the regime from the imminent collapse. Syria Syria is the next target for sure. The Syrian regime will soon be put under heavy pressure to start a process of disengagement from all "extremist" Palestinian and Lebanese fronts that have been long based in Damascus. Syrian support of Hizbollah would be exaggerated. Time tables and deadlines for compliance would trigger another round of tension in the region. The United States has already made very clear statements about the need to completely neutralise the threat Hizbollah or Hamas pose to Israel and bring an end to Syrian role in their activities. Economically, the cheap Iraqi oil would get dry for Syria and other unfriendly governments around the world. Muslim countries could never use oil as a weapon but after capturing oil sources in the Middle East, the US would show by example how to tantalize Syria, for example, for oil that it used to purchase at a price of just $5 a barrel for its 150,000 barrels per day consumption. Syria will have to distance itself from all "terrorist" organizations and get seriously engaged in giving Israel more concessions or face the consequences. Saudi Arabia Saudi-Arabia has once more conceded military bases and other facilities for launching a war on a Muslim country - this time without any justification of a threat of war from Iraq. The anti-Saud regime forces in Saudi Arabia are more active than ever, especially those who are against the presence of US troops in the country. In the process of US overhauling regimes in the Muslim world, Saudi Arabia would cease to be the main oil supplier to the US. Its revenues from oil would drastically drop and with the diminishing US interest in defending a pro-US regime, the forces waiting in the wings would call an end to the Saud dynasty. By the time, the Saudi regime realize that the US is no more interested in saving them, it would be too late for starting a process of change within its foreign policy systems in particular. This steps suggested by Crown Prince Abdullah in a proposed 'Arab Charter'[11](11) - submitted at the Arab Summit Conference in Bahrain in March 2003 would become agenda of those who replace the present rulers. The Charter calls on regional leaders to end "the silence that has gone on for too long" about the "explosive situation in the area." Unfortunately, they couldn't act without tasting the ruthless assault of Bush the crusader. Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan….. The pro-US regimes in countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc., will no longer be able to override the negative ramifications of what is happening around in the Middle East. The will be in no position to continue selling the idea that support for the US position is in their national interest against the feeling of the bulk of Muslim population. A pro-US regime change in Cairo or Islamabad will provoke US wrath and the war will keep spreading for saving one or another strategic interest on Uncle Sam's long list. Israel Israel will enter into defence and economic pacts with the new Iraqi regime to end the state of war between the two countries. The new regime in Iraq will have no option but to weaken the negotiating positions of both Syria and the Palestinians vis-à-vis Israel. The peace treaty with the US-run Iraqi government will give Israel strategic depth on its eastern borders all the way to Iran. Israel's strategic relations with Turkey will grow further both for encircling Syria and confronting Iran and Pakistan. The anti-Islamic rhetoric is at fever pitch today. Last June, the prophecy magazine Midnight Call warmly endorsed a fierce attack on Islam by Franklin Graham (son of Billy) and summed up Graham's case in stark terms: "Islam is an evil religion." In Lindsey's 1996 prophecy novel, "Blood Moon,"[12] (12) Israel, in retaliation for a planned nuclear attack by an Arab extremist, launches a massive thermonuclear assault on the entire Arab world. Genocide, in short, becomes the ultimate means of prophetic fulfilment. Bush and his fellow devote Christian view Israel's founding in 1948, and its recapture of Jerusalem's Old City in 1967, as key end-times signs. They also see the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, and a future rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple on a site sacred to Muslims, as steps in God's unfolding plan. The most hard-line and expansionist groups in Israel today, including Likud Party leaders, have gratefully welcomed this unwavering support. When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the United States in 1998, he called first on Jerry Falwell, and only then met with President Clinton.[13] (13) The PLO and Hamas will lose all the financial and moral support they have been receiving from the Middle Eastern regime. Even though none of these could do much to support the intifada militarily, the Palestinians have always felt psychologically that Arabs are their main support in its struggle against Israel. Palestinian resistance groups will continue to receive support from the burgeoning Islamic groups in the region and beyond. Massacre of Palestinians will continue with tremendous pressure to leave the presently occupied Arab territories by Israel. With further displacement of Palestinians in the event of war beyond Iraqi borders, the Israeli dream of greater Israel would be realized in the near future. Palestinians state would, however, forever remain a dream. In short, the US attacks on Iraq is just a battle of the upcoming broader war. Since the Muslim weaponry can't begin to match the American military, so the coming broader war will not be fought on battlefields of the US choice. It will be fought wherever the Arab warriors and their Muslim allies choose to fight it. Removing
Saddam Hussain would not make any difference, because such regimes
are artificial creations of Western imperialism anyway. They neither
control the Arab warriors nor command their loyalty. The real
warriors, fighting for the soul of Islam despise the Arab dictators,
whom they regard as usurpers, traitors to Islam. The Israelis and their agents also want the US to topple the Arab regimes, their enemies. For the first time, Israeli interests and those of the Muslim masses coincide. Nobody can predict where all this will end. History is full of surprises. You may know all the balls on the pool table, but you can't foresee how they will ricochet when the cue ball breaks them. But it's always unwise to suppose that anyone can control history's patterns. The US Government will defeat the Iraqi regime, but how the balls will ricochet during and after the war is another matter entirely - especially since Bush and his inner circle have not stopped to ask themselves whether they're fighting the right enemy for the right objective. And this aimlessness has turned Bush into a blessing in disguise for the world of Islam which deserved this drubbing for real awakening. End Notes [1]
Roy Gutman and John Barry, Newsweek, August 19, 2002. Bush response
to a question during an interview to Bob Woodward of Washington
Post. Comments of Commerce Secretary Don Evans to CNN Correspondent
Bruce Morton on CNN March 11. 2003 segment titled: "Should
Religious Faith Guide a President in Global Policy?"
[2] Bush response to a question during an interview to Bob Woodward of Washington Post. [3] Comments of Commerce Secretary Don Evans to CNN Correspondent Bruce Morton on CNN March 11. 2003 segment titled: "Should Religious Faith Guide a President in Global Policy?" [4] Paul S. Boyer, When U.S. Foreign Policy Meets Biblical Prophecy, AlterNet, February 20, 2003. See http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15221 [5] Joe Conason, Is George W. Bush God's President? New York Observer, March 20, 2003 http://www.observer.com/pages/story.asp?ID=5333). [6] Jackson Lears, How a War Became a Crusade, New York times, March 11, 2003. [7] Jane Lampman, "New scrutiny of role of religion in Bush's policies," Christian Science Monitor, March 17, 2003 [8] Roy Gutman and John Barry, Newsweek, Aug. 19, 2002 issue. [9] Ibid [10] Husain Haqqani, Apocalypse now: It's a mythical war," IHT, Wednesday, March 19, 2003. [11] Washington Post, January 15, 2003. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A63186-2003Jan15?language=printer [12] http://isbn.nu/1888848073 [13]
Paul S. Boyer, When U.S. Foreign Policy Meets Biblical Prophecy,
AlterNet, February 20, 2003 |
Shoba Sama-o-Basr
(Multimedia Department)