From
Baghdad to Bishkek, the Caliphate's time has come
by Simon Jones
Uzbekistan's unending
tragedy - 15 years of unremitting repression of its
Muslims (OK, make that a century) - has reached a
critical impasse. With the massacre of up to a 1000
innocents in Andijan, the mood in the country is set
against Karimov: there is no graceful exit for this once
wily balancer of clan greed, untempered by any basis in
Islamic principles of social justice and public service.
But Karimov and Uzbekistan are not alone. A recent
analysis of Tunisia (Le Monde
6/5) describes the poverty and anomy of life under its
repressive, secular, pro-US dictator Ben Ali, with his
playtime democracy, prohibition of all Islamic parties
and general discouragement of Islam, and above all the
fear to make even the mildest public criticisms. We can
say Ditto more or less for Egypt, Algeria,
Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia... Then there are
such embarrassments as Dubai, which is building a high
tech Disney-style archipelago replica of the world
for the super-rich, or the Emirates, which imports
Russian and Uzbek women as sex slaves. It is very hard to
find a Muslim country which reflects the austere social
justice of the Koran. But then it is hard to find a
Muslim country which is not a US-client state. Malaysia
and Iran come to mind, and in their own very different
ways, they offer some hope.
In his July 4th speech this year, Bush hailed the new era
of democracy, the result of US battles from Bunker
Hill to Baghdad. Leaving aside Bunker Hill and
what's left of the American Revolution, we can already
see the democracy that the US is bringing to Baghdad and
Kabul - the kind where the living envy the dead, of which
there are hundreds more with each passing day. No. The
call should be: 'From Bishkek to Baghdad, the Caliphate's
time has come.' And ironically, though Karimov loudly
proclaims himself its greatest enemy, he is unwittingly
one of its greatest assets, constantly raising its
specter in justification of his persecution of Uzbek
Muslims. Irony: never has the Muslim world been so
enslaved to kufr
(anti-Islamic) countries and leaders, and yet never has
it been so demonized and despised by them. While western
media construct fantasies to the contrary, this is the
sad, tragic reality.
Karimov's contribution to the Caliphate
Karimov's relationship with Islam is complex. In 1990,
when he was campaigning for president in Uzbekistan's only
relatively free election, he addressed an Islamic meeting
of 40,000 in Namangan organized by the religious movement
Adolat (Justice),
even praying on stage, to the delight of the
demonstrators, and promised its charismatic leader Tahir
Yuldashev, the future founder of the Islamic Movement of
Uzbekistan, that he would build lots of mosques and let
Islam flower, that "the road should be opened to
become friends with and get help from Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Iran and Turkey, so that we can become a united
Muslim state."*
Coincidentally, after securing his election, he also
promised his secular nationalist rival Mahammad Salih of
Erk, who had come a respectable 2nd, that he would be a
strong nationalist leader and allow the flowering of
secular democracy. Apparently he was convincing, as both
leaders were taken in and initially supported him. Of
course, he reneged on both these incompatible promises
and proceeded to issue death sentences on both his
nemeses. (The heroic Yuldashev died fighting to overthrow
K; the wily Salih lives comfortably in Norway and
recently met with Secretary of State Rice.)
US choices
Now that the US willingly or unwillingly has chosen to
bring on another of its CIS velvet revolutions, what are
its alternatives? It looks like the pressure is on to
allow the legal operation of only pro-US, pro-market
nationalist parties Birlik,
headed by Pulatov (living in exile in US), and Erk,
headed by Salih (living in exile in Norway), plus
Hidoyatovas Free Peasants party and Umarovs
Party of Agrarians and Entrepreneurs. [Update: the
business leaders associated with the unofficial
opposition 'Sunshine Coalition' are now being persecuted
and some are fleeing the country.] Recently a Congress of Democratic
Uzbekistan was set up in the US by these and
other US-sponsored Uzbek dissidents, bringing its
favorite sons together in one happy, politically correct
opposition force much like Chalabi's Iraqi National
Congress.
In short, a mirror image of the phony independent parties
set up by Karimov to give a semblance of democracy
(National Democratic, Patriots, etc). Not a word about
religious parties or greater freedom for Muslims to
organize, and certainly no intention of promoting Muslim
unity.
Stalin without socialism
By obsessively condemning the idea of Islam as the
formative principle of Uzbek society, Karimov takes his
direction from an earlier dictator who ruled over
Uzbekistan. And I dont mean Amir Temur. His style
and methods are chillingly like those of Stalin in
everything except Stalin's concern for basic economic
standards for the masses. There is no social security net
anymore, and Stalin (oops, Karimov) can't seem to
understand that his self-exaltation and cold-blooded
disdain for his people is his nemesis, that violence will
now increase until a full-blown crisis, including
international isolation and possibly intervention, is
reached.
Because Stalin could point to the solid socialist
achievements of his ruthless reign ('Islam without
Allah'), and because he had control over a huge
territory, his rule was safe as long as his terror
apparatus was in tact. Thus, the 1920-30s movement for a
united Turkestan was easily repressed and indeed
forgotten as the SU consolidated itself as a political
system without meaningful internal borders, and ancient
Turkestan was carved up into competing, dysfunctional
Central Asian 'republics'. Furthermore, the pressure for
a modern-day caliphate was not so great where all Muslims
could interact in work and culture, and where basic
social needs were met.
Logic of the Caliphate
But 'caliphate'? Yes! Bsy first promising the idea, and
then ruthlessly suppressing even the normal practice of
Islam, let alone any mention of some hare-brained
caliphate, Mr Karimov has made himself captive to it, and
like Lady Macbeth, must wash and wash and wash again the
guilt for his political intrigues from his bloodied
hands. By continually harping about Hizb
ut Tahrir and its program of trying
to revive the political unity of Muslims, he merely
provides greater legitimacy to the idea. A unique feature
of this part of the Muslim world is that it has
experienced both socialism and capitalism and knows first
hand the weaknesses of both, so the argument in a
nutshell, to paraphrase Lenin, would be something like
"the 21st c Caliphate = communism + the Koran."
An Islamic explanation would take the following form:
Muslims base their identity first and foremost on Islam,
and Islam being a universal religion, they naturally will
overcome kufr
nationalism and work together to realize the ideal state,
based on the Koran's detailed and surprisingly robust
program. The very concept of nationalism is a western one
and became the predominant political force surprisingly
late, only with the triumph of capitalism and the
ascendancy of secularism in the 19th c. It reached its
most criminal form in Nazi Germany and today in Israel.
It must be abandoned in favor of the unity of all
Muslims, rejecting the nationalist regimes sponsored by
imperialism - first British and now American - to keep
Muslims divided.
This politics, once reversed throughout the Muslim world,
would of course lead to all Islam countries working
together. Yes, Mr Karimov, that's what the dreaded
caliphate is all about. And what's so wrong with it? Why
shouldn't Muslim countries throw off their western
masters and use their immense clout to fight the real
sources of terrorism - USrael and its secular quislings
like you?
History
of the Caliphate
The Caliphate refers to the first great flowering of
Islam and its rapid spread to form a mighty
spiritually-based empire with various centers from the
7-14th cc in the Middle East and Central Asia. The Caliph
is the leader of the Ummah
(community of Islam). The word caliph (khalifa)
is Arabic for stewardship of nature and family, a key
obligation of all Muslims (vs the Old Testament
"dominion over nature"). The Caliphate was
unquestionably far more civilized than feudal Europe,
despite a near death blow from invasions by the Mongols
(who were NOT Muslim) and the Europeans in the 10-12th c.
For a while in the 8th c it even looked like Christianity
might reconcile with this latest monotheism, but Rome
suppressed its revisionists and eventually the disastrous
Crusades turned ecumenism back a 1000 years (just as
Bush's present Crusade is ensuring that no compromise is
possible with the Muslim world). It was only with the
rise of capitalism and imperialism that the Ottoman
Caliphate was overpowered by a now secular, materialist
monolith and destroyed by the winners of WWI,
the spoils divided among the Judeo-Christian empires of
Britain, France and later the US and Israel.
In reality, the present war against Islam began in the
late 19th c and has continued ever since. While Jewish
and Christian cultures embraced the soulless materialism
of capitalism, Islam remained and still remains unwilling
to reform itself to suit the needs of Mammon. However,
the onslaught by the capitalist powers and the ex-Soviet
Union has had its toll on the Muslim world, setting up
small malleable states with secular governments now
dominated by the US. The aim is to continue to westernize
Muslim societies, by seduction or force if necessary, to
make them willingly accept US (make that USraeli)
imperialism. But the final count is not in.
Present
nadir and rebirth
Islam has shown incredible resilience in the face of this
unremitting attack, which has increased exponentially
after the collapse of the SU, or rather, because
of it and the blow that dealt the left in the West. Since
then, it's been full steam ahead for the USraeli imperial
project, leaving Muslims (plus Cuba's communists and
Venezuela's Bolivarians) as the only significant
countervailing force.
"The triumph of Islam will most likely come after
severe crisis - social, economic and ecological - leading
to the military abandoning the kufr
regime [Uzbekistan looks like a case in point] and
through a coup d'etat proposing a pro-Islamic system to
stabilize the society now bankrupt and suffering economic
collapse."*** Think Nasser or Chavez.
There is the distinct possibility that soon the
international order will collapse, along with the US $ as
world currency, and bank-created fiat money, with or
without the 'peak oil' wildcard. So this scenario is not
as far-fetched as you might think. Look for more about
Iran and Malaysia's gold dinar as the $ continues to
sink. Funny how capitalism's physical nemesis - oil - is
found predominantly in Muslim countries, along with its
spiritual nemesis - the Islamic ban on fiat money and
usury and other (wise) restraints on economic activity.
Funny how precisely the Muslim world
holds all these keys to the world's economic salvation.
Perhaps Allah really does
exist.
No doubt Marx would chuckle if he were to be told that
"Yes, world capitalism is doomed to collapse, but so
is socialism, and it is ancient Islam that will survive
to rebuild economic relations built on stewardship of
nature, social justice, the gold standard and
prayer."
Central Asia as a crucial link in the logic
Just as the secular attempts at pan-Arabism by Gaddafi,
Nasser and Hussein failed, Kemal Ataturk's earlier
flirting with pan-Turkish nationalism in Central Asia
collapsed as the Soviets consolidated their grip in the
1920s and replaced Islam as a binding force with
socialism. However, with the collapse of the SU, the
pressure or desire for such a union of all Muslim
Central Asian states is much more compelling, and with
the revival of Islam in Turkey, it is in a position to
dispense with its wanabe fascination with secular Europe
and turn to embrace the Muslim world to the east. The only
solution to the 'Kurdish' problem is to base society on
its one common denominator: Islam. Already Afghanistan
and Iraq, with their US-controlled governments, have
formulated constitutions based on Islamic law and Iraq
has begun to work closely with Iran. And the only
way to hold Iraq together and to end the stand-off in
Afghanistan is (excuse the mantra) to appeal to the one
common denominator: Islam.
The pseudo-nationalism promoted by Central Asian leaders
to secure their power and state theft has meant that they
are all pathetic backwaters, unable to create a
meaningful common economic space. Borders, visas,
customs, etc. are all used to fill corrupt
officials pockets, hindering any rational economic
revival. The blatant maneuverings here of Europe, USrael,
China, and Russia, each with its own anti-Muslim,
anti-Central Asian agenda, makes it especially urgent
that Central Asia unite.
Interestingly, even in the present state of political
disarray, both Kyrgyzstan, with its 'tulip revolution'
and Uzbekistan with its ruthless pro-US (oops, anti-US)
dictator, are trying to close their US bases, suggesting
there's a compelling logic to resist US hegemony, even
without that unity. Ironically, the very suppression now
of Islam throughout the region only adds fuel to the
desire to rebuild society without Big Brothers imposing
their secular fantasies.
Once Islamic-based parties such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir
are allowed to organize openly, honest citizens will be
able to criticize the horrendous mess here. This
is what democracy should be about. It would
also empty the jails of many thousands of devout Muslims
in Uzbekistan. So what if an Islamic party comes to power
and Central Asia becomes greater Turkestan? So what if
women wear headscarves? I suspect local Russians (i.e.,
everyone) would be much better off than under the present
clan-based mafias and the ever-present specter of
official or opposition violence. Of course, it would mean
a drastic reduction in prostitution and restricted
alcohol sales. And a big move away from the trashy
American culture that floods the TV and airwaves here. A
small loss IMHO.
Long-term scenario
The focus of Central Asian politics should be to unite
the 60+m Central Asians, with their rich resources and
ethnically close peoples, as a political and economic
block to resist the various imperial agendas, to ensure
the dignity and livelihood of the largely Muslim, Turkic
peoples living here. Combined with Turkey's 70 million,
Iran's 70 million, Pakistan's 140m and the Middle East,
and we can see a superpower in the making second only to
China, but one based on social justice, not greed and
violence.
This will be the first step in uniting all Muslims from
Morocco to the Philippines. Once the Central Asian states
shake off the western imperial yoke, including their
erstwhile 'friend' Russia, and join with their Turkish
cousins, their example will inspire the Arabs to the west
and the Asians to the east. Whereas once upon a time, the
Caliphate emanated from Mecca, now it will be renewed
from the home of the medieval Islamic renaissance, the
home of Al-Faridi, Avicenna and Ulugbek.
Yes, the time for reconstituting the Caliphate, uniting
Muslims throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, has
come. The free ride that British and US imperialism (OK
and the Soviet Union) have had, training and propping up
secular political leaders (fluent in English or Russian
and trained in the UK, US or Moscow), is over. The SU
pushed too far in trying to incorporate Afghanistan into
the socialist fold, and the US has gone one better (i.e.,
worse) with its invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and
its attempts at soft landings for other Muslim
states-in-trouble are not panning out. Uzbekistan is a
fine example of this.
There is no way out except by turning to Islam as the
only force capable of overriding the greed and downright
evil of secular politics. This is not an easy road.
Imperialism will not give up without a fight, and just as
it ably assisted in destroying the SU, it is hard at work
undermining any Islamic alternative. We can only thank
Allah (and maybe his Catholic and secular fellow
travelers in Latin America) that there is still a light
at the end of the long, dark tunnel.
***
*Mir Kaligulaev, "The road to death is greater than
death," Black Quadrat UK 2005
**HuT, "The method to re-establish the
Khalifah," UK 2000
***Abid Ullah, "Approaching the actual end of
history" 3/6/5
http://simonjones1.blogspot.com/2005/07/from-
bishkek-to-baghdad-caliphates.html
|