Part 6: The One GOD:
(read part1, Part2, Part3, Part4 and Part5)
Central to the Islamic faith is the belief in one supreme being, the faith in Allah, His oneness. Centrality of this belief indicates that for one to claim being Muslim must first gain thorough knowledge of the concept of Allah in Islam based on the Quran. The meaning and significance of the concept of Allah in Islam is so wide and profound that it is beyond the scope of any one writing to capture. Nor is one individual blessed with the immense knowledge and understanding necessary to undertake such task. I shall therefore limit my discussion to some of the key elements of the concept.
The belief in Allah demands a certain mindset, specific practices and clear conditions being accepted. First and foremost is to accept Him as the one and only one of his Kind. One who created the earth, the heavens and everything else that makes the universe(s). Only one entity alone has the supreme authority over everyone else, all other thing, that one entity is our Lord, Allah the most powerful. This belief marks the beginning of ones journey in Islam.
But this acceptance of Allah as the one supreme authority, the ultimate entity who is the creator, sustainer and master of everything that exists is often difficult to explain in the fullest. To understand the implication in real is even more difficult. But the Most Kind, Most Merciful and Compassionate lives up to his name even on this aspect. Allah the almighty has told us His most beautiful names each of which signifies a specific quality, an attribute of Him. To understand our Lord one must understand these beautiful names and their meanings. To show complete and perfect acceptance of the authority of our lord it demonstrate that our actions in every steps embed the necessary implications of such names that defines the Most Magnificent. Below are some of the ninety nine most beautiful names:
Tuesday, 1 April 2008
Arab Unity for Global Stability
Last week some of the Arab leaders gathered in Syria in the latest round of meetings held by the Arab League, an organisation of Arab nations found to forge unity between the member states. Even before the event started, it was marred with news of boycotts by various key players. The meeting of the remaining leaders therefore created little hype in media and other circles.
After the formation of United Nation and the successful partnership of European nations in the European Union, many other alliances were formed with great ambitions. Some of these alliances were born out of a strong desire to counter opposing political blocks, some with genuinely honest and sincere commitment to develop meaningful inter-state partnership to break new grounds. Today however, barely any of these institutions of Nations other than the European Union plays any meaningful part in the affairs of the lives of those living within the geo-political arena of those organisations. Yet at the present climate, given the wars, environment and many other important issues, should have been the perfect one for many of the international organisations to play vital role on shaping the future of our world.
The Arab league from the perspective of the global peace and stability should have had an important role to play. If the league was able to work and managed to get the member states to take the organisation seriously, it could have played the most influential rule with potential to become the dominant voice at the international level. The question is though why, despite the similarity in language and culture unique to the Arab states only, it has failed to realise its dream to unite the nations under the umbrella? Here I shall seek to find some answers.
Perhaps the most successful institution of the modern nation states is the European Union. Despite many centuries old hostilities between prominent states and huge differences in language and even culture EU managed to function in manners unique in world history. Today EU is one of the largest economic blocks which speak as one voice on issues of vital importance to the advancement of national interest. Despite political and social challenges, EU has successfully brought her leaders to unite on one platform for the interest and benefit of their collective nations. Some may argue that this success has been made possible due to EU’s financial and technological sophistic which makes the membership of the organisation worthwhile. But such argument sounds unconvincing as it fails to explain the coming together of nations previously being involved in destroying one another. The fundamental reason has been that in the post world war error and with decreasing power of the monarchs, Europe managed to define itself with a common philosophy. Call it secularism or democracy or both, the reality are that the EU member states share a common political ideology which unites the states to act as one voice at the world stage.
The Arab states that formed the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab League and other inter-state organisations may have had a moment goodwill that sprung the desire of coming together to work as one group of nations; they neither had the political unity nor common interest. It may even be argued that neither of these states had been able to define their political identity therefore unable to come up with long term strategies. The inability of these states to define their political identity and the subsequent failure in identifying their national objectives made them vulnerable to outside influence. As a result, although these nations gained independence, they remained largely influential by various old colonial masters.
The reason behind analysing the issues at play which made it impossible for these organisations to function is to come up with a remedy. The Arab states are located at a strategically important part of our planet blessed with significant reserve of natural resources. In fact it may be argued that the life line of global energy supply is offered by some of these states. Moreover, these states also represent the greatest challenge to the survival of human race as a peaceful civilisation. For political and religious reasons, Arab states occupy perhaps the central position in global politics and are therefore capable of defining future world. A united platform of Arab nations is the need of our time to challenge the status quo that exists. For the sake of global security and stability we need the Arab nations to be able to have common social, political and cultural goals. The leading nations of our world need to understand and work towards those objectives.
At present the divided Arab states may be offering some relief to the global powers as it allows them to influence as they will, but it is costing our world far too much in lives and other aspects unsustainable for long. To prevent further spread of civil unrest, political instability and the end of global peace, the entire globe should act to facilitate understanding between the Arab states. Such activism will result in a stable, secure and prosperous world whose future would not be almost predictable.
After the formation of United Nation and the successful partnership of European nations in the European Union, many other alliances were formed with great ambitions. Some of these alliances were born out of a strong desire to counter opposing political blocks, some with genuinely honest and sincere commitment to develop meaningful inter-state partnership to break new grounds. Today however, barely any of these institutions of Nations other than the European Union plays any meaningful part in the affairs of the lives of those living within the geo-political arena of those organisations. Yet at the present climate, given the wars, environment and many other important issues, should have been the perfect one for many of the international organisations to play vital role on shaping the future of our world.
The Arab league from the perspective of the global peace and stability should have had an important role to play. If the league was able to work and managed to get the member states to take the organisation seriously, it could have played the most influential rule with potential to become the dominant voice at the international level. The question is though why, despite the similarity in language and culture unique to the Arab states only, it has failed to realise its dream to unite the nations under the umbrella? Here I shall seek to find some answers.
Perhaps the most successful institution of the modern nation states is the European Union. Despite many centuries old hostilities between prominent states and huge differences in language and even culture EU managed to function in manners unique in world history. Today EU is one of the largest economic blocks which speak as one voice on issues of vital importance to the advancement of national interest. Despite political and social challenges, EU has successfully brought her leaders to unite on one platform for the interest and benefit of their collective nations. Some may argue that this success has been made possible due to EU’s financial and technological sophistic which makes the membership of the organisation worthwhile. But such argument sounds unconvincing as it fails to explain the coming together of nations previously being involved in destroying one another. The fundamental reason has been that in the post world war error and with decreasing power of the monarchs, Europe managed to define itself with a common philosophy. Call it secularism or democracy or both, the reality are that the EU member states share a common political ideology which unites the states to act as one voice at the world stage.
The Arab states that formed the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab League and other inter-state organisations may have had a moment goodwill that sprung the desire of coming together to work as one group of nations; they neither had the political unity nor common interest. It may even be argued that neither of these states had been able to define their political identity therefore unable to come up with long term strategies. The inability of these states to define their political identity and the subsequent failure in identifying their national objectives made them vulnerable to outside influence. As a result, although these nations gained independence, they remained largely influential by various old colonial masters.
The reason behind analysing the issues at play which made it impossible for these organisations to function is to come up with a remedy. The Arab states are located at a strategically important part of our planet blessed with significant reserve of natural resources. In fact it may be argued that the life line of global energy supply is offered by some of these states. Moreover, these states also represent the greatest challenge to the survival of human race as a peaceful civilisation. For political and religious reasons, Arab states occupy perhaps the central position in global politics and are therefore capable of defining future world. A united platform of Arab nations is the need of our time to challenge the status quo that exists. For the sake of global security and stability we need the Arab nations to be able to have common social, political and cultural goals. The leading nations of our world need to understand and work towards those objectives.
At present the divided Arab states may be offering some relief to the global powers as it allows them to influence as they will, but it is costing our world far too much in lives and other aspects unsustainable for long. To prevent further spread of civil unrest, political instability and the end of global peace, the entire globe should act to facilitate understanding between the Arab states. Such activism will result in a stable, secure and prosperous world whose future would not be almost predictable.
Monday, 17 March 2008
To be a Muslim
Part Five: Defining Islam
[Click on Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four to read teh previous post on this series.]
In the lines written as part of this series of posts, the underlined objective has been to understand what it means to be a Muslim. To be more precise, what are the elements of one beliefs, what practicalities are involved in becoming a Muslim and how does that affect our personal, familial and social existence, the relationship with others. But of course Muslim are those who believe in Islam. In other words, the followers of Islamic faith are the Muslims. So it right that we at this stage attempt to define Islam:
Literally speaking, Islam is to mean peace, submission. Islamically, it is a set of believes, values and practices which one undertake as an expression of their submission to their lord, Allah and through this they gain peace, tranquillity and success. So to define Islam we must understand three different elements of Islam:
- The believes,
- The Values, and
- The practices
Of course a closer look at these three will reveal that what Islam really means is that it is a complete code of life which dictates the living of those who believe in it. In other words, Islam is a way of life that Muslims follow, or in the context of many Muslims today, suppose to follow. So to speak about Islam, its believes, values and practices, is to speak of all aspect of human life, issues that affects humanity on a daily basis. Such discussions will be long and will require huge amount knowledge, resources and thinking. In fact, it would be fair to say that such discussions in any one collection is almost impossible. For this reasons here I shall restrict defining Islam in terms of looking at its some of the most fundamental believes resulting in some of the core values and the subsequent implications in life, the most common practices.
[To be continued]
Thursday, 13 March 2008
To be a Muslim
Part four: Understanding our Faith (continued)
[Click to read Part One, Part Two and Part Three of this series]
Sunday, 9 March 2008
To be a Muslim
Part three: Understanding our Faith
[This post follows two prior posts which can be read by clicking on Part One Part Two]
Let us, as I am speaking from the perspective of a Muslim, not be apologetic but confident in fighting the bigotry, ignorance and xenophobia so strongly embedded in the social fabric of our world. It is not faith, not Islam and most certainly not the Muslim identity responsible for the evils of our present world. We do not accept nor shall we ever accept the Islamophobic assertion made so commonly in the ‘civilised’ and ‘free world’. But for us to be confident and fight vehemently against the outrageous positions adopted by the global masters and to expose their vulnerabilities, we need to understand our faith, our identity.
At the core of our understanding of Islam lies the rejection of classification of Muslims in categories stated above. There can never be extremist, intolerant, terrorist Muslims. Muslims are of just one kind who are the ‘witness upon mankind’ made to be the nation of ‘moderation’. We are by default a nation of the middle path who rejects extremism, victimisation, intolerance etc. our faith have no room for bigots and xenophobes who are determined to diminish the human values. Our faith teaches us to be part of a global nation, caring, compassionate, participating, responsible and all other attributes that can be assigned to the ideal citizens of a nation, a global community. Our responsibility, commitment and goodwill is not just towards the fellow Muslims but to our neighbours, fellow citizens, friends, colleagues, wayfarers, all people around us regardless of their faiths, gender, race etc. Islam’s message transcends beyond humanly classifications of society and people and includes the whole of humanity, the entire mankind. Faith in our lord, believing in the message that our prophet has brought is for the entire mankind and is aimed at creating harmonious society where prosperity, peace and mutual respect will flourish.
Of course, following my assertion, the claims made of our faith will give rise to obvious questions as to why then are Muslims globally so unruly in places, irresponsible, ignorant, illiterate, intolerant etc? the answer is again very simple which requires us neither to be extremists, isolationists nor apologetic. Although the fundamentals of Islam is still preserved, the Quran and sunnah is intact to this date, the teachings of Islam has been eroding from Muslim life for centuries. The era of colonisation and the suppression that saw the decapitation of Muslims globally forced Muslim institutions, social orders and political authorities disappear over time. Consequently there remained Muslims, maimed, persecuted, deprived and demonised who neither had the opportunity nor the mean to learn about their faith. Most centres of Islamic learning we see in our local community have sprung up in the last century. Deprived of the central political and judicial authority, Islamic faith have grown to be the football which is kicked around as necessary by the various interest groups, the sections of human society. Then in the era of geographical nation state there has been a renewal of Islamic identity, a revival of Islamic spirit. These Islamic spirit is giving rise to increasingly committed and confident Muslims demanding their faith to take up central place in their life. Unfortunately this development has been seen as a threat by the prevailing global powers, including the rulers in predominantly Muslim states. The fear of loosing political power and the identification of Islamic block as threat lead to actions and reactions which causes exploitation of people’s emotion and ignorance to further political interest of various groups which leave us to the present state.
(To be continued)
[This post follows two prior posts which can be read by clicking on Part One Part Two]
Let us, as I am speaking from the perspective of a Muslim, not be apologetic but confident in fighting the bigotry, ignorance and xenophobia so strongly embedded in the social fabric of our world. It is not faith, not Islam and most certainly not the Muslim identity responsible for the evils of our present world. We do not accept nor shall we ever accept the Islamophobic assertion made so commonly in the ‘civilised’ and ‘free world’. But for us to be confident and fight vehemently against the outrageous positions adopted by the global masters and to expose their vulnerabilities, we need to understand our faith, our identity.
At the core of our understanding of Islam lies the rejection of classification of Muslims in categories stated above. There can never be extremist, intolerant, terrorist Muslims. Muslims are of just one kind who are the ‘witness upon mankind’ made to be the nation of ‘moderation’. We are by default a nation of the middle path who rejects extremism, victimisation, intolerance etc. our faith have no room for bigots and xenophobes who are determined to diminish the human values. Our faith teaches us to be part of a global nation, caring, compassionate, participating, responsible and all other attributes that can be assigned to the ideal citizens of a nation, a global community. Our responsibility, commitment and goodwill is not just towards the fellow Muslims but to our neighbours, fellow citizens, friends, colleagues, wayfarers, all people around us regardless of their faiths, gender, race etc. Islam’s message transcends beyond humanly classifications of society and people and includes the whole of humanity, the entire mankind. Faith in our lord, believing in the message that our prophet has brought is for the entire mankind and is aimed at creating harmonious society where prosperity, peace and mutual respect will flourish.
Of course, following my assertion, the claims made of our faith will give rise to obvious questions as to why then are Muslims globally so unruly in places, irresponsible, ignorant, illiterate, intolerant etc? the answer is again very simple which requires us neither to be extremists, isolationists nor apologetic. Although the fundamentals of Islam is still preserved, the Quran and sunnah is intact to this date, the teachings of Islam has been eroding from Muslim life for centuries. The era of colonisation and the suppression that saw the decapitation of Muslims globally forced Muslim institutions, social orders and political authorities disappear over time. Consequently there remained Muslims, maimed, persecuted, deprived and demonised who neither had the opportunity nor the mean to learn about their faith. Most centres of Islamic learning we see in our local community have sprung up in the last century. Deprived of the central political and judicial authority, Islamic faith have grown to be the football which is kicked around as necessary by the various interest groups, the sections of human society. Then in the era of geographical nation state there has been a renewal of Islamic identity, a revival of Islamic spirit. These Islamic spirit is giving rise to increasingly committed and confident Muslims demanding their faith to take up central place in their life. Unfortunately this development has been seen as a threat by the prevailing global powers, including the rulers in predominantly Muslim states. The fear of loosing political power and the identification of Islamic block as threat lead to actions and reactions which causes exploitation of people’s emotion and ignorance to further political interest of various groups which leave us to the present state.
(To be continued)
Wednesday, 20 February 2008
Dysfunctional democracy
Kenya, once a model for Africa, is burning. A seemingly stable democratic nation all of a sudden is now at the brink of a potential civil war. Anger rages across the nation setting tribes into fighting, neighbours attacking neighbours. Around quarter of a million people are made homeless and nearly a thousand made to loose their lives. The whole nation is in fear of being embroiled into the kind of conflicts which is keeping most of the continent of Africa from ushering a progressive error. The question one would naturally ask is ‘what made a reasonably coherent country dive into so much turmoil?’
At the outset of my article here, let us remind ourselves that this nightmare scenario resulting into the worst civil strife in recent history of Kenya started from the highly disputed result of the Presidential election. This round of violence is the latest embodiment of immaturity on the part of the political establishment to whom personal interest gains priority over nations peace, stability and progress. But why is our leaders seemingly so selfish and irresponsible in their acts and deeds?
In 2000, a highly contested presidential election took place in the USA with Al Gore from the Democratic Party loosing narrowly to George Bush of the Republicans. In fact, the popular vote gained by Al Gore was more than President Bush and the key state that decided the election had a lot of controversy over the process of vote counting. There were strong reasons for Al Gore to make a stand. But in the end Al Gore decided to accept the result in favour of Bush saving the Nation from a potential Constitutional crisis. Why could this not set a precedent for others especially in the third world?
The answer to the questions I posed in earlier paragraphs, in my view, are simple: in the US, like most other European nations, democracy has developed to the extent that it is not the person, nor even the process itself, but the national interest that gets priority over all other considerations. America’s is one of a many such incidents often seen in the developed nations of our world. Democracy there has taken root and is supported, guided and protected by a mature population and numerous civil, political and intellectual institutions.
Countries like Kenya are of a growing list where democracy is increasingly proving to have failed. In these nations, primarily in Africa and Asia, democracy has given the tribal chiefs, political dynasties and financial elites powerful means to influence the condition of the country in their favour with much of the population deprived of any meaningful share in the affairs of their country. This is increasing civil strife, poverty and social imbalance in areas such as economy, education and health care. The issue of poverty and inequality in societies across nations in the developing world creating conditions in which extremism and violence find roots. The dominant political forces are using the ‘cause of democracy’ to suppress political opposition. Using the issue of terrorism and ‘safeguarding’ democracy, these forces selfishly marginalising their own people while also keeping the global community in darkness of their evil motives.
So what should happen? Should the idea of democracy cease to exist as the superior mechanism of governing nations rightfully? Most certainly not. For so long as the core concept of democracy means equality, justice, fairness and freedom, democracy should and must be seen as the right method of choosing government, ensuring rights and discharging political responsibilities. However, the words and a few elections alone should not symbolise the democratisation of nations. Democracy with simply elections neither creates equity nor social stability. It requires certain mindset on the part of the politicians and the people. This mindset is not God ordained natural characteristics of people and nations but an outcome of a long term activism by serious institutions led by patriots in each nation.
The reasons why people in the developing nations, like in Kenya, respond to the calls by selfish, misguided and ill motivated politicians is because they see no mean to hold their governments accountable, nor any medium to channel their grievance to the keepers of powers. The masses, almost feeling helpless, resorts to violence as they see it to be the only mean to bring the government down to account for miss-governance. The leading nations claiming to be the guardians of democracy, peace and stability of our world needs to support the developing nations in building institutions which empowers ordinary masses. Such institutions should make people feel capable of holding their governments accountable. Developing an infrastructure which will embed such institutions will offer a platform for aggrieved people to debate and express their dissatisfactions. However, efforts to build such infrastructure with these civil institutions must be allowed to operate freely without dictation by specific governments/quarters to only nurture a specific kind of ideology. The people must truly be allowed to decide for themselves what course they wish to take.
At the outset of my article here, let us remind ourselves that this nightmare scenario resulting into the worst civil strife in recent history of Kenya started from the highly disputed result of the Presidential election. This round of violence is the latest embodiment of immaturity on the part of the political establishment to whom personal interest gains priority over nations peace, stability and progress. But why is our leaders seemingly so selfish and irresponsible in their acts and deeds?
In 2000, a highly contested presidential election took place in the USA with Al Gore from the Democratic Party loosing narrowly to George Bush of the Republicans. In fact, the popular vote gained by Al Gore was more than President Bush and the key state that decided the election had a lot of controversy over the process of vote counting. There were strong reasons for Al Gore to make a stand. But in the end Al Gore decided to accept the result in favour of Bush saving the Nation from a potential Constitutional crisis. Why could this not set a precedent for others especially in the third world?
The answer to the questions I posed in earlier paragraphs, in my view, are simple: in the US, like most other European nations, democracy has developed to the extent that it is not the person, nor even the process itself, but the national interest that gets priority over all other considerations. America’s is one of a many such incidents often seen in the developed nations of our world. Democracy there has taken root and is supported, guided and protected by a mature population and numerous civil, political and intellectual institutions.
Countries like Kenya are of a growing list where democracy is increasingly proving to have failed. In these nations, primarily in Africa and Asia, democracy has given the tribal chiefs, political dynasties and financial elites powerful means to influence the condition of the country in their favour with much of the population deprived of any meaningful share in the affairs of their country. This is increasing civil strife, poverty and social imbalance in areas such as economy, education and health care. The issue of poverty and inequality in societies across nations in the developing world creating conditions in which extremism and violence find roots. The dominant political forces are using the ‘cause of democracy’ to suppress political opposition. Using the issue of terrorism and ‘safeguarding’ democracy, these forces selfishly marginalising their own people while also keeping the global community in darkness of their evil motives.
So what should happen? Should the idea of democracy cease to exist as the superior mechanism of governing nations rightfully? Most certainly not. For so long as the core concept of democracy means equality, justice, fairness and freedom, democracy should and must be seen as the right method of choosing government, ensuring rights and discharging political responsibilities. However, the words and a few elections alone should not symbolise the democratisation of nations. Democracy with simply elections neither creates equity nor social stability. It requires certain mindset on the part of the politicians and the people. This mindset is not God ordained natural characteristics of people and nations but an outcome of a long term activism by serious institutions led by patriots in each nation.
The reasons why people in the developing nations, like in Kenya, respond to the calls by selfish, misguided and ill motivated politicians is because they see no mean to hold their governments accountable, nor any medium to channel their grievance to the keepers of powers. The masses, almost feeling helpless, resorts to violence as they see it to be the only mean to bring the government down to account for miss-governance. The leading nations claiming to be the guardians of democracy, peace and stability of our world needs to support the developing nations in building institutions which empowers ordinary masses. Such institutions should make people feel capable of holding their governments accountable. Developing an infrastructure which will embed such institutions will offer a platform for aggrieved people to debate and express their dissatisfactions. However, efforts to build such infrastructure with these civil institutions must be allowed to operate freely without dictation by specific governments/quarters to only nurture a specific kind of ideology. The people must truly be allowed to decide for themselves what course they wish to take.
Saturday, 26 January 2008
Instrument of Injustice
In recent years United Nations’ Security Council (UNSC) has been on the news to become synonymous with three issues: the war in Afghanistan, the Invasion of Iraq and the nuclear programme of Iran. Although I am sure UNSC undertakes a lot of other very important tasks, it seems on the surface to be driven by a specific group of nations united by a common agenda.
Invasion of Iraq proved UN to be almost ineffectual on the face of powerful nations not adhering to their commitment to the UN. US for example have defined its responsibilities in terms which suits them while also proved to the UN to be indispensable regardless of what she does. With Iran, US proved UNSC to be an organisation which ultimately will come to take US agenda as one of its own, be it somewhat watered down. The latest round of sanctions planned on Iran is just yet another example of such thus making UNSC an instrument of injustice which causes hardship in the life of ordinary people in relatively less militarily powerful nation.
One of course may feel that I have been little harsh towards the UN and have been ignorant of the important role she has played over the years to keep the order of our world. For this reason, it is must that I shall put some fact in the lines below to support my assertion. Here, I only intend to take the matter relating to Iran for today.
What are the issues involving Iran? A rogue state contempt to kill? A nation lead by fanatics? A power determined to destroy our world through funding extremists terrorists? Let us look at some facts to find the answers. But first we must look at the issue of nuclear proliferation and Iran. It is alleged that Iran is content to make bombs using nuclear technology which they must not be allowed to. Although Iran screams loud and clear to claim that their technology is for peaceful energy production purposes and shows no clear sign of making any bombs, US and some European countries continuously been raising their suspicion and demanding that Iran stop enriching uranium. Iran’s understood refusal gives reason to these nations to call for sanction and use their influence to use UNSC to pass resolution to this end.
Question is though how is it logical for nations already equipped with lethal weapons that includes powerful nuclear bombs decide Iran not having the right to poses the nuclear technology and know how for the purpose of producing electricity? Why should they be allowed to raise suspicion on an independent nation who has neither shown any sign of producing such bombs nor has acted aggressively? Every nation should have the right or no one, to develop nuclear technology. Even if we assume that Iran is going to make bombs, why must the nations causing chaos and carnage over centuries all across the world possessing nuclear bomb should have the authority to demand Iran must stop possessing nuclear enrichment technology just because they suspect them to be making bombs? Does that sound fair? Or Just? To me it sounds plainly illogical and clearly prejudicial.
Of course one of the reasons used to support the arguments to stop Iran from having nuclear technology is that Iran is an ‘unstable’ nation whose leaders must not be trusted or relied upon. This assertion is demeaning and must be seen as insulting to the people of Iran. The people of Iran in respectable numbers , far more than many so called western nations, turn out to vote to elect their leaders. The leaders of Iran are elected by their people legitimately to lead their nation. No one must have the right to question the wisdom of a people who have a history of civilisation unique to many nations.
For fear of lengthening my lines, I shall refrain from many more arguments which can be placed powerfully to prove the prejudice and hostility shown unjustly towards Iran. What I shall say to end however is that Iran is on the wrong side of a self proclaimed ‘force for good’ who take it upon themselves to discipline whichever nation step outside the limit set by these imperial arrogant powers with a desire for global domination. They chastise to further their own ‘interest’ at the core of which is to ensure the superiority of US and her allies at the expanse of all others. Iran is a bad apple strategically placed to challenge the supremacy of a major ill of our world, Israel. Sadly, UN has proved itself to be a force, an instrument of these nations to use to legitimise their actions. This way, they use UN and various organs of her to cause suffering, injustice and carnage around the world. UN is no longer a force for good guarding the peace and stability of our world. In fact, UN now is an instrument to legitimise injustice, a weapon of oppression and global dominance for a few.
Published in the Daily Star in Bangladesh on Wednesday, 30th January 2008: http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=21142.
Invasion of Iraq proved UN to be almost ineffectual on the face of powerful nations not adhering to their commitment to the UN. US for example have defined its responsibilities in terms which suits them while also proved to the UN to be indispensable regardless of what she does. With Iran, US proved UNSC to be an organisation which ultimately will come to take US agenda as one of its own, be it somewhat watered down. The latest round of sanctions planned on Iran is just yet another example of such thus making UNSC an instrument of injustice which causes hardship in the life of ordinary people in relatively less militarily powerful nation.
One of course may feel that I have been little harsh towards the UN and have been ignorant of the important role she has played over the years to keep the order of our world. For this reason, it is must that I shall put some fact in the lines below to support my assertion. Here, I only intend to take the matter relating to Iran for today.
What are the issues involving Iran? A rogue state contempt to kill? A nation lead by fanatics? A power determined to destroy our world through funding extremists terrorists? Let us look at some facts to find the answers. But first we must look at the issue of nuclear proliferation and Iran. It is alleged that Iran is content to make bombs using nuclear technology which they must not be allowed to. Although Iran screams loud and clear to claim that their technology is for peaceful energy production purposes and shows no clear sign of making any bombs, US and some European countries continuously been raising their suspicion and demanding that Iran stop enriching uranium. Iran’s understood refusal gives reason to these nations to call for sanction and use their influence to use UNSC to pass resolution to this end.
Question is though how is it logical for nations already equipped with lethal weapons that includes powerful nuclear bombs decide Iran not having the right to poses the nuclear technology and know how for the purpose of producing electricity? Why should they be allowed to raise suspicion on an independent nation who has neither shown any sign of producing such bombs nor has acted aggressively? Every nation should have the right or no one, to develop nuclear technology. Even if we assume that Iran is going to make bombs, why must the nations causing chaos and carnage over centuries all across the world possessing nuclear bomb should have the authority to demand Iran must stop possessing nuclear enrichment technology just because they suspect them to be making bombs? Does that sound fair? Or Just? To me it sounds plainly illogical and clearly prejudicial.
Of course one of the reasons used to support the arguments to stop Iran from having nuclear technology is that Iran is an ‘unstable’ nation whose leaders must not be trusted or relied upon. This assertion is demeaning and must be seen as insulting to the people of Iran. The people of Iran in respectable numbers , far more than many so called western nations, turn out to vote to elect their leaders. The leaders of Iran are elected by their people legitimately to lead their nation. No one must have the right to question the wisdom of a people who have a history of civilisation unique to many nations.
For fear of lengthening my lines, I shall refrain from many more arguments which can be placed powerfully to prove the prejudice and hostility shown unjustly towards Iran. What I shall say to end however is that Iran is on the wrong side of a self proclaimed ‘force for good’ who take it upon themselves to discipline whichever nation step outside the limit set by these imperial arrogant powers with a desire for global domination. They chastise to further their own ‘interest’ at the core of which is to ensure the superiority of US and her allies at the expanse of all others. Iran is a bad apple strategically placed to challenge the supremacy of a major ill of our world, Israel. Sadly, UN has proved itself to be a force, an instrument of these nations to use to legitimise their actions. This way, they use UN and various organs of her to cause suffering, injustice and carnage around the world. UN is no longer a force for good guarding the peace and stability of our world. In fact, UN now is an instrument to legitimise injustice, a weapon of oppression and global dominance for a few.
Published in the Daily Star in Bangladesh on Wednesday, 30th January 2008: http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=21142.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
