Unlike the noble cause of digging out Saddam’s atrocities, Islam Karimov’s recent massacre in Andijan is being buried deep because in his words, the victims “wanted to establish Khilafah.” Atrocities of similar, dictatorial regimes in many Muslims countries are acceptable to the “civilized” world because these are considered as secular bulwarks against Hizb ut Tahrir-like movements, whose main crime is the struggle for establishing Khilafah.
The deadstream media makes everyone believe that the trouble started, at the earliest, around the Taliban’s coming to power in Afghanistan. In fact, the global troubles have been attributed to Khilafah since its inception in the 7th century. Thirteen centuries later, when the British Empire abolished the remnants of Khilafah in 1924, it took a sigh of relief and considered it as the ultimate victory against Islam.
To the utter disappointment of Britain and its allies, the problem, nevertheless, remains. Khilafah still provides motivation to many actions and reactions; movements and counter-movements. Consequently, the centuries old zeal of Islamophobes to abolish Khilafah is as much the root of all unacknowledged terrorism as the renewed zeal of Muslims to re-establish it is the mother of all solutions.
The major problem with Khilafah is the morbid dread it strikes in the hearts of the totalitarians who are determined not to allow Muslims to get united, exercise their right to self-determination and living by the Qur’an. The key to materializing these objectives lies in thwarting Muslim’s organized struggle towards establishing Khilafah.
Just a thought of this struggle leads the Islamophobes into taking many pre-emptive measures, which, in turn, lead to grievances, reaction and counter measures on the part of Muslims.
The more the time passes, the more people realize importance of a central, independent authority for Muslims. Unlike all the dead revolutions of human history, the 7th century revolution in the heart of Arabia not only culminated in establishing a way of life but also set guidelines for a basic governance mechanism, which are still valid today.
This realization of the need to have a central, independent authority for Muslims is directly proportional to the struggle on the part of Islamophobes who will never allow Muslims to establish an alternative model to the existing unjust socio-political and economic order.
The “war on terrorism” is a post 9/11 slogan. In fact, it is a summary title for all the anti- Khilafah efforts: from intellectual escapades to legal hurdles, wars, occupations, detentions and torture. In this process, terrorism is used as a synonym or Khilafah.
One can notice this by carefully listening to the brief statements at the end of summits and conferences these days. It seems as if there is nothing going on in the world except terrorism. The crux of all messages is: We are committed, determined and one against the evil of terrorism. We would not allow terrorists to win. They are against our values and way of life.
A realistic look forces one to ask: Where does the alleged ‘Muslim terrorism’ stand in comparison to the mass killings, tortures, detentions, and exploitations carried out by the legitimized institutions and licensed states. This shows the war is actually on something other than the deceptively labeled terrorism.
One month before 9/11, New York Times reported that most Americans are made to believe, terrorism “is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal.” The Americans are made “to think that the US is the most popular target of terrorists and they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.” Larry C. Johnson, nevertheless, concludes: “None of these beliefs are based in fact,” ( NY Times July 10, 2001: The Declining Terrorist Threat).
Johnson cites figures from the CIA reports. Accordingly, deaths from “international terrorism fell to 2,527 in the decade of 1900’s from 4,833 in the 80’s.” Compare the 2,527 deaths in the 90s due to acknowledged terrorism with the death of 1.8 million in Iraq during the same years due to unacknowledged terrorism of the US, its allies and the UN. The US and allies’ terrorism remained unacknowledged because they justified it with lies about Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction. Also compare the 4,833 deaths due to acknowledged terrorism with one million deaths due to unacknowledged aggression of Iraq against Iran on the behest of the US and its allies.
So, what is consuming the world: the acknowledged terrorism of Muslims or the unacknowledged terrorism of the US and its allies?
This brings us to the point that the endless tirades about terrorism that we hear from Bush, Blair and their presstitutes and deadstream media are all directed at holding Muslims from exercising their right to self-determination. Anything in the name of Khilafah in particular becomes part of the struggle towards this end and is instantly criminalized.
Many believe these measures are part of the wider crackdowns for safety in the wake of 9/11. This, however, is not true. The reality is that anything in the name of Khilafah has been ridiculed and presented as a threat to safety since 1924 in particular. The reason: Islamophobes do not want to see Khilafah re-emerge after their assuming in 1924 that they are done with it forever.
An example of this attitude is the reaction in the British press at the eve of Khilafah Conference in London in 1994, long before the staged 9/11 and 7/7. A headline in Independent (August 07, 1994) reads: “Muslim body accused of racism: Muslim rally angers Jews.” A headline in Telegraph (August 8, 1994) reads: “Wembley survives the Muslim call to arms.” An inset in the same story reads: “Fundamentalists’ Elusive Dream of An Islamic Empire.”
The morbid dread of Khilafah is evident from the editorials in the leading British dailies at this occasion. “The threat of Jihad,” reads title of the Telegraph editorial, which goes on to link Khilafah conference with the happenings in Algeria: “Islamic fundamentalists won a majority in recent elections, but, for political reasons, have been denied by the old guard.” The editorial goes on to sow the seeds of dissention among Muslims: “in Britain yesterday, for example, a rally of Islamic fundamentalists caused nothing but alarm by its challenge to the British Muslim community’s moderate leadership.”
Guardian attempted to belittle the conference in its August 8, 1994 report with comments such as: “Much of the Islamic rhetoric meant little to many of the young British Muslims,” as if the participants were forced to join the conference.
The fear mongering trend was not limited to a few presstitutes. Times titled its editorial: “Marching Muslims: Reminder of the need for vigilance” (August 08, 1994) and went on to scare the public: “The rally yesterday of some 8000 Muslims in Wembley Arena provoked understandable nervousness in Britain and abroad.” That “understandable nervousness” is not there since 1994, or 7/7, but since 1400 years. It didn’t end with systematically abolishing Khilafah in 1924.
A report in the Independent (August 8) by Tim Kelsey went to the extreme in fear mongering. Headline of the report tells the whole story: “Fundamentalist gathering seeks political overthrow of Western democracies: Muslims call for Israeli state to be destroyed.”
It is understandable that the enemies of Khilafah would go to any length, beyond these fear mongering reports, to discredit Muslims’ objective and deny them the right to self-determination. This includes staged terror attacks, lies for justifying invasions and occupation, and support to criminal regimes, which promise, in turn, not to let Muslims live by Islam. That’s how the turmoil widens and the hopes for peace diminish with each passing day.
It is absolutely impossible to deny Muslims the right to self-determination and living by Islam forever with the help of occupations, mass deceptions, and puppet regimes. The more these three elements are sustained, the more the resistance and reaction will grow. The sooner there is an end to intervention and withdrawal of support from the corrupt regimes and the divisive factions with made-in-Washington brands of Islam, the sooner a central authority among Muslims would emerge.
The scare mongers in the West would lose absolutely nothing in the process, not even oil. Muslims many not even demand reparation for centries of the colonial rampage and holocausts worse than Hitler’s. The totalitarians among them, however, would only have to give up on their dreams to make everyone on the surface of the Earth live by their “way of life.”
Generally it is thought that if there is a khalifah, that will be the khilafat or at the most revival of khilafat that was abolished in 1924 will serve. That’s ridiculous. It’s the just order, the socio-politico, economic system, not the khalifah that matters. So Mulsims must beware of ‘khilafah’.