Supporting Dictatorship

O you who believe, respond to the call of Allah and His Messenger when He calls you to that which would give you life...

JUMADA AL-AWWAL - JUMADA AL-AKHIR 1430 ··· MAY 2009 ··· ISSUE: 06

REFORMING ISLAM IN THE NAME OF ‘TERRORISM’ - ‘NATO –ARMED WING OF THE WEST’ - THE BANGLADESH ARMYMASSACRE - THE BASIS OF AUTHORITY IN THE ISLAMIC STATE -RECESSION - WHEN THE CASINO ECONOMY MEETS THE REALECONOMY - THE CORRUPT VALUES OF BRITISH POLITICS

The Real Agendabehind the War on Terror

KMAG MAY 2009:Kmag template201x269 18/05/2009 13:06 Page 1

NEWSBITES

2 :: Khilafah Magazine :: May 2009 www.khilafah.eu

12 TERROR SUSPECTS RELEASED DUE TONO EVIDENCEThe recent case of 12 terror suspects in abomb plot in the UK being released withoutcharges is nothing surprising. Home Officestatistics showed 669 of the 1,228 peoplearrested in terrorist investigations were laterfreed during the period September 2001 toJuly 2007. What is poignant about thisepisode is to whip up a media frenzy overhow Pakistan is supposedly becoming a“failed state”. UK prime minister, Gordon Brown used theepisode for political propaganda, challengingPakistan to do more to root out terrorism.With the US-driven military onslaught inNWFP by America and stoking up fear of“militants” taking over, world public opinionis being prepared that Pakistan possiblyneeds a Western intervention like the onesin Iraq and Afghanistan.

Having destroyed the lives of these youngMuslims who had aspirations for the futurebut are now facing imminent deportation,the concepts of justice, innocent untilproven guilty and fair trial, all have becomea misnomer in this society for Muslims. Theblasé method in rounding up Muslims andcreating havoc in their lives for little morethan political reasons has become the norm,provoking the question – Is the governmenttrying to create ‘cohesion’ or mayhem at agrassroots level.

MPS EXPENSES ROW Given the grim economic picture, it is littlesurprise to hear of the intense scrutiny thatgovernment MP's have come under, after itwas revealed that MP's in the past financialyear have managed to clock up over £93million in expenses. This famously includesthe Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, whodespite earning £142,000 a year, hasmanaged to pass off her husbands ‘dirty’viewing habits, plant pots and even abathroom plug as 'expenses'.Yet, despite the shameless abuse of theexpense system by British MP's, they appeardestitute as a church mouse compared tothe current democratic politicians andleaders of the Muslim world -who don’tneed to bother filling out expense claims,instead just robbing the Ummah as they

please. In contrast, true leaders, of the likes of'Umar bin Khattab (ra) are known forleading such austere lives, that whilst inoffice foreign dignitaries could notdistinguish 'Umar from the rest of thepeople for his simple dress. It is narratedthat even the governors under 'Umar wererequired to make a promise not to wear fineclothes or eat of sifted flour. These weremen who truly served the people, and didnot use the people to serve themselves.Such qualities can only be found in leaderswith taqwah.

UN ANTI – RACISM FOLLYWestern delegates walked out when Iran’sPresident Mahmoud Ahmedinejad madecomments at the UN’s racism conference inGeneva saying Israel was a racist entity,created and backed by Britain and America.Millions around the world would notdisagree with this analysis, after Israel’sbrutality against the Palestinians becameever more blatant following the recentmassacre in Gaza. However, many are stillbewildered as to why Iran sat back andhypocritically blamed other regimes inMuslim countries for doing nothing, insteadof acting decisively to stop Israel’s assault,and even liberating the land.

The main act of the day, however, came fromsome of the 23 nations that walked out. TheUS state department had previously said thatit found the conference guiding document’sdiscouragement of the “incitement toreligious hatred” unacceptable as this rancounter to the “US commitment tounfettered free speech”. Yet when it comesto exposing Israel these same westernnations and bastions of free speech refuse toeven share a room with someone whosimply wishes to speak freely about anuncomfortable truth.It seems free speech is a value held dearonly when it serves a political interest.Hardly surprising given the track record ofdouble standards we routinely see from thewest when it comes to Islam and Muslims.

WOMEN ON THE FRONTLINEIn the book The Lonely Soldier: The PrivateWar of Women Serving in Iraq by HelenBenedict the harsh realities of life in the USmilitary for women was exposed. Whilstproclaiming to be the champion of women’srights globally, the United States is proven tobe spectacularly failing to protect thesecurity and needs of females in its armedservices. With female soldiers often fearing rape andharassment from their male colleagues morethan the enemy they are fighting in order tospread ‘freedom and democracy’, it is thevalues of the US forces which are exposedas being barbaric and backward rather thanthose of ‘the enemy’ in Iraq, Afghanistan andother Muslim lands.If according to several studies of the USmilitary funded by the Department ofVeteran Affairs 30% of military women areraped while serving, 71% are sexuallyassaulted, and 90% sexually harassed, onehas to wonder if this is how the men of theUS armed forces treat their own women,what sort of behaviour would they exhibitwith those they consider to be theirenemies?

SOME UK SCHOOLS HIRING BOUNCERS TOCOVER LESSONS The Daily Mail newspaper has reported thatsome schools are employing ex-nightclubbouncers, ex-soldiers and ex-prison officersto stand in for absent teachers. Classroomdiscipline, it seems, has become so bad thatthe schools are forced to sometimes think ofeducational supervision more like 'crowdcontrol'. The news came at the conferenceof the National Union of Teachers, where itwas also heard that many teachers face somuch stress during term time that mentalhealth problems are rife.Western societies have eroded respect tosuch an extent that increasingly teachers areabused by pupils, and indeed their parents.This latest strategy merely illustrates howbad things have become. It seems thesolutions proposed always end up beingmore authoritarian instead of thinking aboutthe core values in society that give youngpeople the example that they should be freeto disrespect anyone they want, regardlessof the consequences.�


Rebrandingthe ‘War onTerror’In April 2009 former British PrimeMinister Tony Blair made a speechjustifying military intervention andcolonialism in order to crush the globalIslamic revival. He called for themilitary occupation of Afghanistan tocontinue "until the job is done" andinterference in Pakistan's educationsystem to counter the rise in Islamicvalues.

But while Blair openly exposed that the‘war on terror’ is actually a war onIslam, Western governments havedesperately trying to change the imageof their colonial and, frankly, murderousforeign policy. They have ditched theterm ‘war on terror’, but are stillbombing Muslims in the border regionbetween Pakistan and Afghanistan. Theyhave denounced their use of torture,but decided not to prosecute anyone

for the torture undertaken by the CIA,and that outsourced to foreign regimes.But rebranding the ‘War on Terror’ willbe about as successful as the attemptsto rebrand Swine flu. Their tone, stylesand terminology might have changedbut essentially the policies are thesame.

The military aspect of the war hassimply changed to focus away from Iraqand onto NATO’s so-called Af-Pakstrategy. Other than Obama’s offensivetitle for this strategy (as onecommentator said, could you everimagine a conflict between China andJapan being named ‘Chink-Jap’) the US-led NATO conference showed, ifnothing else, that the lies haven’tchanged. NATO has tried to justify theon-going operation with rhetoricsuggesting that the opposition facingthem in Afghanistan is equivalent orgreater to the threat of the Warsaw pactcountries. In truth, the US has itsdesigns set much wider thanAfghanistan. Its aggression in Pakistan isescalating, and the instability theregrows greater every day.

Double-speak both in Britain and theUS, regarding Pakistan, has never beenso great, with alternate day briefingsfrom ‘good cop’ and ‘bad cop’ – oneattacks Pakistan as the source of allterrorism, a failed state, imminentlyabout to collapse, with a pacifyingstatement from the other the very nextday.

In the UK, the government launched itsnew anti-terror strategy Contest 2.Contest 2 proposed education reformsin Pakistan, locking up terror suspects(which it promptly implemented withthe arrest of twelve innocent Pakistani

students), and a new push to win‘hearts and minds’ in the UK. This partof the strategy known as ‘Prevent’ is anexplicitly ideological and totalitariancampaign against Islam, portrayingIslamic values as extreme, and trying tobully Muslims into accepting westernliberal values.

The question arises why the need tobully, bomb and beat Muslims like this?When one sees that in the space of thepast few weeks alone, we have seen thesentencing of the European sickpervert Josef Fritzl, the shame of MPsexpenses in the UK, the rise in burglaryand theft in Britain – all set against thebackdrop of the G20 conference tryingto salvage disaster Capitalism – theanswer becomes more obvious.

Selling secularism, liberalism andCapitalism to Muslims is becoming liketrying to sell derivatives to an investor– they are seen as toxic. Islam is clearlyseen as the only alternative to this wayof life, and its re-emergence as anideology threatens to loosen the gripthat the west has on the assets of theMuslim world.

As Allah (swt) instructs in the Qur’an.

“And when it is said to them, ‘Do notcause corruption in the earth’, theysay: ‘We are only putting things right’.Verily, they are the ones who makecorruption but they perceive not” -[TMQ Al-Baqarah:11-12]

And Allah Almighty speaks the truth.�

Khilafah Magazine :: May 2009 :: 3www.khilafah.eu

Editorial


The UK Government’s latestanti-terrorism strategy“Contest 2” includesdetailed plans to makeMuslims secular, westernisedand liberal. Abdul Wahid hastaken a detailed look at thestrategy

INTRODUCTIONIn February 2009, draft plans by the UKgovernment were leaked to the Guardiannewspaper and the BBC Panoramaprogramme, which exposed that theBritish government has an updatedpolicy for Islam and Muslims. The leakfocused on the definition of ‘extremism’.It was followed by a speech byCommunities secretary Hazel Blears thatreinforced the message that, according tothe government, the definition of an‘extremist’ included:

• Belief in a Caliphate (Khilafah) inthe Muslim world.

• Promote Shariah law – for anywhere in the world, and even

the personal aspects of Shariah in the UK.

• Belief that Jihad, or armed resistance, is permitted - anywhere in the world including armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military.

4 :: Khilafah Magazine :: May 2009

Reforming Islam inthe name of‘Terrorism’

Dr Abdul Wahid

www.khilafah.eu


• Belief that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah.

• If you fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The leak caused such uproar amongstMuslims that when the actual 160-pagepolicy was published the detaileddefinitions were noticeably absent.Instead, there were general statementsabout ‘extremism’, those who oppose‘shared values’ and the political ideas of AlQaida – linking some of these coreIslamic ideas to a group that is constantlylinked in the media to violence.

However, there can be no doubt that thislatest strategy is nothing more than a planto westernise Muslims, to make themsecular and liberal. They wish to detachMuslims from any Islamic political ideasand either be apolitical or follow politicalideas that are accepted in westernsocieties.

The policy provides detailed evidencethat the government's projects andfunding for mosques, community centres,youth groups and women's groups areaimed at changing the deen that theMuslims hold. These projects are about

gathering intelligence (though the policedeny this) and their grants are to lead ourcommunities in becoming addicted togovernment money, so they can thendictate to us what we can and cannotthink, believe or say.

Overall, the policy is likely to fail, as itseeks to target matters that are too centralto Islam. However, even if it fails overall, itmay succeed in corrupting some smallnumbers of Muslims. And only Allahknows who that small number who fallvictim to that plan could be. It could beyour children that think that sex outsidemarriage and homosexuality are normal;that cut off their ties to the Ummah; thatstart to abhor the Shariah of Allah (SWT)– and may Allah protect us from that. Those who accept the money that isgiven under the guise of preventingviolence, thinking we can control it, orthat if we turn it down othercommunities will get it instead, need to

think again. The money we are beingasked to take is not for combating terrorbut for suppressing Islamic values.Our duty is not to be passive, but todistinguish our values from theirs, andbuild a community able to resist theattempts to change Islam. We shouldunderstand the noble Islamic values. Wemust stand for Islam and carry thesevalues to others by word and example, tosave them from the harm of their owndestructive way of life.

DETAILS WITHIN THE ‘CONTEST 2’STRATEGY PAPERThe policy is divided into 4 parts: “Pursue”– “Prevent” – “Protect” – “Prepare”. Thesections called “Protect” and “Prepare” doaddress the threat of a terrorist attack like7/7. But it is the “Pursue” and “Prevent”agendas that are worth looking at indetail. Below are some points that emergefrom the strategy paper.

1) The policy blames Islamic ideas(labelled as “Islamism”), not politicalproblems for the causes of terrorism.

It explicitly labels the struggles inPalestine, Chechnya, Bosnia, Afghanistan,Iraq and Kashmir as ‘terrorism’. It blames ‘Islamism’ – naming Syed Qutband Maududi as proponents of thisthinking – as one cause of ‘terrorism’ andunderplays the significance of oppression,occupation and injustice in the Islamicworld and western foreign policy –repeating Tony Blair’s talk about falsegrievances - and talking about Muslimperceptions of foreign policy.

It describes the political ideas of Al-Qaidaand in doing so implies that anyone whobelieves this believes in the politicalagenda of what they call ‘Islamicterrorism’. The ideas they name are:

a) Viewing all regimes in the Muslim world as un-Islamic or apostate

b) ‘Claims’ that western states support these regimes

c) Fighting occupation and fighting regimes as rewardable in the akhira

d) A desire to overthrow these regimes by force or subversion

e) A desire to establish a Caliphate

f) A desire to remove western presence from Muslim lands

Hence, there is a huge emphasis in thewhole strategy to deal with ideology ascompared with dealing with occupation,oppression and injustice.

2) It explicitly links the domesticpolicy to the global war on terror.It talks about ‘failed states’ as a cause of‘radicalisation’ and mentions Pakistan andthe FATA region. One strand of the“Prevent” agenda is so that there can be a“positive UK contribution to ‘violentextremism’ in priority overseas countries”-i.e. it justifies on-going interference by thewest in the Muslim world. To this end‘Contest 2’ mentions funding 700 schoolsprojects in Pakistan and Afghanistan, toprevent radicalisation. It talks aboutpromoting “moderate” scholars tours toMuslim lands, hoping they will promotethe UK government agenda. They wish topromote the UK overseas, as a centre forIslam outside the Muslim world. They


It could be your children that think that sex outsidemarriage and homosexuality are normal; that cut offtheir ties to the Ummah; that start to abhor the Shariahof Allah (SWT) – and may Allah protect us from that.


even plan to use aid from the Departmentfor International Development as a kindof PR function. So far they have usedMuslim charities and well known Muslimpersonalities like MPs to do this.

3) It continues with their establishedcontroversial draconian anti-terrorpolicies

The “Pursue” strand of the strategy is saidto be about foiling terrorist networks andplans. There is lip service to humanrights/rule of law but essentially stop and

search, arbitrary arrest and prosecutions,28-day detention without trial, controlorders to detain suspects indefinitelywithout trial, financial sanctions,deprivation of citizenship, monitoringcommunication, covert surveillance andco-operation with other states e.g.Pakistan – are all set to continue. Some of these tools have been usedagainst peaceful demonstrators (not onlyMuslim), charities, people browsingwebsites, people making emotionalspeeches, in addition to the peoplesuspected of “terrorist plots” – whetherwithin the UK or in places such as Iraq.

4) The “Prevent” strand of thestrategy has little to do with preventing‘terrorism’ or promoting ‘communitycohesion’; as we are told is said toprevent the spread of ideology andradicalisation in the UK & Globally.The majority of the “Prevent” strategyaimed at Muslims in the UK: to controlMuslim communities, establish a newleadership, make Muslims reject Islam’spolitical ideas, and ultimately to seculariseMuslims. It is the assimilation agenda - toprevent the spread of Islamic values –what they call ‘extremism’ - and promote‘shared’ (western liberal) values. How do they plan to achieve thewesternisation agenda of the “Prevent”strategy?

At the moment they don’t plan to uselegal means to get Muslims to dropIslamic views and to adopt western liberal

values. Instead they want an atmospherelike 1950’s America under the ‘witch-hunts’ of Senator McCarthy.

They say they wish to demonise peoplewho hold Islamic views and block themfrom being active by intimidation. Theyhave projects under the umbrellas of:

• ‘Preventing Violent Extremism’ programmes (PVE) – to be implemented by Local councils, the Voluntary sector and statutoryorganisations (like the local

Commission for Human Rights).

• The Prevent strategy delivery plan– run by the Police with an extra 300 paid support staff. This includes Operation Nicole where police run workshops in which community members are put in scenario's where they take the role of counter-terrorism police officers who watch a 'cell' and debate if they should move in.

• The Channel Project - this is a government funded project wherepolice meet with young people inforums and have open discussionsand, through this, identify who they think are potential extremists. There has been similar advice given to teachers in schools with classroom discussions on political issues, andto university lecturers.

WHAT ARE THE DETAILED PROJECTSAND MEANS OF CONTROL MENTIONEDUNDER THESE UMBRELLAS?

These include the following:

- Creating new Muslim leaderships.In particular amongst Muslim Women (National Muslim Women’s advisory group and other women’s group), Muslim Youth (Young Muslim Advisory group and other youth counsels)

and Muslim faith leaders who have undergone state sponsored training.

- Policies to clamp down on Islamicviews and promote secular views in schools – through an ‘extremism’ toolkit and in Universities under the guise of fighting ‘extremism’ on campus.

- Citizenship programmes in Madrassas to promote secular views and diminish Islamic views.

- Promoting what they call “moderate” Muslim scholars to speak on any matter EXCEPT

Islam’s political ideas or ideas thatchallenge western secular values.

CONCLUSIONThe British government led a campaign todestroy Islam and promote secular valuesin the Muslim world in the period ofdecline during the Khilafah, to try toweaken the power Islam had over theregion. They did the same when theIndian sub-continent was occupied underthe British Empire – to break the strengthof the Muslim resistance.

These policies worked for only a shorttime period. Now a huge and growingIslamic revival across the Muslim world –as this strategy paper even acknowledges– is testimony to its defeat.

In recent years the British governmentdeveloped new policies. One was toestablish a body to sit over Muslims, andcarry government policy to Muslims. Thisfailed to achieve its objective.

It then tried ‘Contest’ to promote a Britishversion of Islam. This too has clearlyfailed.

Now, we have ‘Contest 2’. Overall thispolicy will fail to achieve its secularisationagenda precisely because they simply donot understand Islam and Muslims. We await ‘Contest 3’!

They seek to extinguish the light of Allahwith their mouths; but Allah refuses butto perfect His light, though thedisbelievers may resent it.(Translated meaning Quran 9:32) �


The money we are being asked to take is not forcombating terror but for suppressing Islamic values.


It was once said by a former US Secretaryof State about Britain that it had lost anempire but had yet to find a role. TheNATO summit recently held inStrasbourg/Kehl marked the sixtiethanniversary of an organisation which haslost the Soviet Union but which is stillstruggling to find a role almost twodecades later. What started off as analliance to keep the Russians out, theAmericans in and the Germans down, isnow scratching around trying to find areason for its very existence. Sixty years in,NATO is growing stale, disunited and moreimperialist in its old age. Rather thanputting on meaningless summits, NATOneeds to be put in a museum.In the most recent summit, NATO leaderscame together to discuss the latestchallenges facing the alliance (no meanfeat as there aren’t any) and to formally

endorse President Obama’s strategy forAfghanistan and Pakistan. They also signedup to the following series of bland andbanal statements over the course of thetwo day summit,

• Agreed that NATO’s InternationalSecurity Assistance Force (ISAF) mission inAfghanistan – NATO’s largest and mostchallenging mission in its history – is keyto preventing Afghanistan from becoming asafe haven for Al Qaeda and the Taliban,and a base for terror attacks that threatenall allies and the entire internationalcommunity;

Comment : Afghanistan is nowconsidered by NATO to be morechallenging than was defeating themighty Soviet Union and the WarsawPact with its thousands of nuclear

warheads and overwhelming superiorityin conventional forces. The Taliban withtheir AK 47’s are now considered byNATO to be more powerful than themighty Red Army which will be news tomost people. NATO members areobviously becoming desperate in tryingto justify their continued existence andan unpopular war to their apatheticdomestic populations.

• And following close and intenseconsultations with the United States on itsAfghanistan-Pakistan review, updatedNATO’s strategic political-military plan forits ISAF mission, stressing that successrequires a stronger regional approach thatinvolves all of Afghanistan's neighbors andgreater civil-military coordination andcivilian resources.

Comment: With respect to Pakistan, theAfPak strategy is now clear and involvesmore of everything. More economic aidfor Pakistan based on performance basedresults, more diplomacy (Mike MullenChair of the Joint Chiefs has been to theregion 9-10 times in the last year andRichard Holbrooke is as ubiquitous inIslamabad as he is in Washington )alongside more troops and more drones.Day by day Pakistan becomes the centralfront in America’s war on terror, anation of 170 million with Islam in theirhearts and nukes on their soil, Pakistanis what keeps western policymakersawake at night. The fear of the greaterMiddle East and the growing strategicimportance of the Indian ocean which arecent US Marine Corps report (Visionand Strategy 2025) cited as being acentral theatre of global conflict and


Sajjad Khan

‘NATO – Armedwing of the West’


competition this century clearly explainsthe importance of US action. Byspecifying the vague goal of defeating alQaeda, this will allow a US presence inthe region for decades to come, causingnot just destabilisation for Pakistan butfor the whole of Central Asia. America’splan if successful would sign the deathwarrant for Pakistan.

• Celebrated the 60th anniversaryof NATO, highlighting the Alliance’ssuccesses while reaffirming the value andthe strategic purpose of the Alliance inproviding collective defense and workingto build a Europe whole and free and atpeace;

Comment: Defense from who, theRussians, the Chinese, the Iranians? Whois exactly threatening NATO at present?Isn’t it NATO that is doing the attacking?

• Agreed to renew NATO’s sharedsense of family united by common values; acommitment to democracy, human rights,and the rule of law;

Comment: Are these the same values thatinspired Abu Ghraib, Guantanomo,extraordinary rendition, the Iraq war,torture, secret prisons, corrupt politiciansand their corporate buddies and supportfor Israel’s massacres in Gaza. Does NATOreally have any credibility talking aboutvalues?

• Welcomed Albania and Croatia asNATO’s newest Allies, reinforcing themessage that NATO’s door remains openand that countries in Europe’s East canbecome members when they meet NATO’sperformance-based standards and are ableand ready to contribute to Allies' commonsecurity;

Comment: A clear provocation aimed atRussia. What would happen if the lattersought a military alliance with Cuba,Mexico and Venezuela. NATO enlargementdevoid of a defined mission is causing

massive instability, the kind of instabilitythat led to Russia’s attack on Georgia in2008.• Committed to a new transatlanticapproach on Russia and Europe’s East thatdeepens cooperation with NATO aspirantsand advances positive engagement withRussia, including by restarting dialogue andcooperation through the NATO-Russia

Council, and agreed to build pragmaticcooperation with Russia in areas of sharedinterest, such as in Afghanistan, counter-piracy initiatives, arms control, andcounterterrorism;

Comment: Is Russia that naive? that itwill be bought off with an invite to aNATO talking shop? Doessn’t it rememberwhat NATO did and said after theGeorgia attack?

• Committed NATO to meetingnew challenges; confronting newasymmetric threats to include terrorism,proliferation of weapons of massdestruction, cyber-attacks, environmentaldegradation and energy disruptions, andthe fallout from failed states and theeconomic crisis;

Comment: Most of these problems arecaused directly by NATO members. Stateterror in Iraq and Afghanistan,proliferating their own nuclear arsenalse.g. Trident in the UK and mini nukes inAmerica. Environmental degradation andthe economic crisis were created in thewest due to a capitalist ideology that iscollapsing under its own excess. Whocreated failed states like Somalia, it wasAmerica and her ally Ethiopia whoremoved the one government (IslamicCourts) which had brought stability toSomalia in the last fifteen years.

• Issued a "Declaration of AllianceSecurity" as a first step towards balancingNATO’s traditional collective defenseresponsibilities with the need tomodernise and transform to address newthreats through the subsequent

preparation of a new "Strategic Concept,"NATO’s mission statement for the future(last updated in 1999), to ensure thatNATO remains as vital to our commonsecurity in the 21st century as it was in the20th century.

Comment: Great words which could havecome from a firm of managementconsultants, but still no clarity as to whatthe mission should be, what is NATO for?

• Selected a new Secretary General,Prime Minster Anders Fogh Rasmussen, tolead the reform of the Alliance so that itretains the flexibility and resources tomeet the new challenges of our time.

Comment: Yes a Secretary General whohas no respect for Islam and who asPrime Minister of Denmark justified thepublication of obnoxious cartoonsdegrading the holy Prophet (sallalahualaihi wassalam). This is the man whowill now be the face for NATO’scampaigns in the Muslim world (youcouldn’t make it up), after the Turkishgovernment sacrificed their “principled”opposition to Rasmussen for a few staffpositions at NATO headquarters.

For a NATO summit meeting marking the60th anniversary of the alliance andintended to be about real substance, theevent was more a damp squib, with NATOallies at best providing lukewarm supportto Obama’s new AfPAK strategy. This wasdespite Obama detailing on the surface ofit a narrowed war mission: emphasisingintense action against Al Qaeda even aboveimplementing secular democracy andwestern human rights.

“We want to do everything we can toencourage and promote rule of law, humanrights, the education of women and girls inAfghanistan, economic development,infrastructure development,” he said. “But Ialso want people to understand that thefirst reason we are there is to root out AlQaeda, so that they cannot attack membersof the alliance.”

The Afghan war remains a dividing line foralliance leaders. In October of this yearNATO’s war in Afghanistan will enter itsninth year, by any measure the Afghancampaign has already been a long war andmost commentators expect will end upbecoming significantly longer than WW1


America has history, from Hiroshima to Korea to Vietnamto its own Civil War, and its bitter divisions of region andrace, it continues to choose violence over stability,imperialism over morality and hatred over hope


and WW2 combined. For the US militarybruised with nearly 4,500 fatalities in Iraq– the Afghan war is fast becoming one ofthe most demoralising chapters in thehistory of the United States. Despitewidespread praise for President Obama’snew inclusive approach, his calls for amore significant European troop increasefor Afghanistan were politely ignored, as

they had been in negotiations leading upto the meeting. European allies agreed toprovide only 5,000 new troops forAfghanistan with 3,000 deployed onlytemporarily to provide security for theAugust elections in Afghanistan. A further1,400 to 2,000 soldiers will be sent to trainteams for the Afghan Army and the police.So much for Afghanistan being critical forwestern national interests. The Afghan warlike the Iraq war before it is fast becomingan American war with Europe steering wellclear. President Obama’s decision toincrease the number of American troopsthis year to about 68,000 from the current38,000 will significantly Americanize thewar. In a recent article in the New YorkTimes a senior European diplomat said “Noone will say this publicly, but the true factis that we are all talking about our exitstrategy from Afghanistan. We are gettingout. It may take a couple of years, but weare all looking to get out.”

It is clear that the new American strategyfor Afghanistan and Pakistan is flawed forseveral reasons

1. The numbers of forces are stillinsufficient to win in Afghanistan (just askthe Russians) and are therefore designed tohold Afghanistan while projecting furtherinto Pakistan. As a variety of US officialshave stated, the strategic prize is Islamabadnot Kabul.

2. The goal to defeat Al-Qaeda isvague and ambiguous and has beendeliberately kept so. At the point of writing,the US administration has failed to publishany performance metrics despite their

insistence that they have learnt the lessonsof Iraq. The US cannot rid Afghanistan andPakistan of Al-Qaeda (when Al Qaeda canexist everywhere in the world including inthe United States) nor can it root out orkill everyone who opposes America orsympathises with its adversaries. Americacannot police the borders of Pakistan untilthey are completely secure (it can’t even

police its own border with Mexico)especially as the US military is the mainsource of the insecurity on both sides ofthe border.

3. By not having defined metrics,the US administration can continue aprolonged war in a strategic location thatborders the energy resources of CentralAsia as well as the geopolitical epicenter ofthe world, the Indian Ocean. Its locationalso has the advantage of neutralisingRussian and Chinese influence in a keyregion of the world.

4. America also doesn’t realise thatit cannot build nations, after systematicallydestroying them with their missiles, dronesand aircraft. It is America that is stoppingIraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan from havinga better future, by insisting that those whooppose her imperial agenda can only bemet by more killing. The US represents theforces that over the age have constantlydestroyed nations for material and strategicgain, a situation which today has led theworld into further cycles of violence andinsecurity. America has history, fromHiroshima to Korea to Vietnam to its ownCivil War, and its bitter divisions of regionand race, it continues to choose violenceover stability, imperialism over moralityand hatred over hope. But hostility andviolence will never be a match for justice;they offer no pathway to a better world;and they cannot stand between the peopleof Afghanistan and Pakistan and the widerMuslim world from a future ofreconciliation and political unity.

It should be clear to the Afghan and

Pakistani people what America’s intentionsare. The United States pursues an imperialclaim on their territory and on theirresources. For them controlling South Asiawould not only degrade Pakistan’scapability of becoming a cornerstone ofthe future Khilafah, but is a stepping stoolin the latest manifestation of the GreatGame being fought with Russia and China.America contrary to its public policy doesnot respect the sovereignty of eithercountry (daily drone attacks in Pakistancoupled with a separate US mission inAfghanistan answering to the Pentagon area testament to that) and it constantlybelittles the tremendous sacrifices that theAfghans and Pakistanis have made insecuring their own countries from foreigninterference. The US is not seeking a fulltransition to Afghan responsibility nor dothey seek real security for Pakistan. Andgoing forward, American forces will ensurethat both states are weakened like Iraqbefore it and become yet anotherstepping stone to America’s new worldorder. The future of Afghanistan andPakistan is inseparable from the future ofthe broader Middle East, so it is key thatAmerica’s nefarious plan to controlAfghanistan and weaken Pakistan bestopped.

There are many lessons to be learned, fromwhat we’ve experienced since 9-11. Wehave learned that America’s addiction towar in the Muslim world, continuesunabated regardless of who sits in theWhite House. We have learned that in the21st century, we must use all elements ofthe Muslim world’s power to achieve ourobjectives, which is why we need topolitically unify our resources, our lands,and our armies to ensure that no oneindividual nation has to fight and sacrificealone. We have learned that our leaders arecorrupt and not up to the task which iswhy they must be removed if we are everto meet the tough challenges of our era.And we have learned the importance ofour iman, that by implementing Islampolitically we can provide a better life notjust for our children but for everyone else’sas well.�


Controlling South Asia would not only degrade Pakistan’scapability of becoming a cornerstone of the futureKhilafah, but is a stepping stool in the latestmanifestation of the Great Game being fought withRussia and China


On the 25th of February 74 officers ofthe Bangladesh Army were massacred inPilkhana in the heart of the Bangladeshicapital, Dhaka. This atrocity was allegedto be committed by a group within theBangladesh Rifles, a paramilitary force of70,000 men responsible for securing the4,000 km long border with India andBurma. Khilafah Magazine interviewsMohiuddin Ahmed, official spokesman ofHizb ut-Tahrir Bangladesh (HTB) tounderstand the events of that day andthe implications for Bangladesh’ssecurity.

1. Can you give your account of what really happened on 25th February,and what is HTB’s position on thistragedy?

I am sure you have followed some newsof the massacre. What happened is reallybrutal and horrific. The killers had withthem a hit list of the officers whom theysearched out and massacred. They didnot stop at that – they mutilated deadbodies of the officers; buried them inmass graves; burnt dead bodies; buriedalive some of the officers; and raped,tortured and killed their wives andchildren including pregnant women. Regarding our position, we made it clearin our leaflet issued on 28 February2009. If I summarize that for you, wemade four important points in thatleaflet: Firstly, the so-called mutiny waspart of a long-term plot and it wascarried out by India and her agentsinside and outside the government.Secondly, the aim of the plot was to

weaken the defence forces ofBangladesh i.e. the Army and the BDR.Thirdly, the government played adubious role in the dealing with the so-called mutiny. Finally, only the Khilafahgovernment can strengthen the defenceforces and challenge the imperialists.

2. Many believe this incident hadan external influence but are notnecessarily specifying which country.What makes you so certain this externalforce was Indian?

We presented an analysis of the event inour leaflet. There are three points thatwe need to keep in mind: What did itachieve? Who benefits from that? Why atthis time?

The answer to the first question can befound in the reality of what hashappened – the Bangladesh Rifles hasbeen more or less destroyed especiallyits chain of command. The Army has lostsome of its brilliant officers and it hasbeen dealt a severe blow. It will take along time to rebuild the BangladeshRifles and for the Army to recover. There is only one external force thatbenefits from all this – India. Firstlyweakening the defence forces ofBangladesh has been a long term Indianplan and she has tried to do this onmany occasions in the past. Secondly theBangladesh Rifles protects theBangladesh border from the Indianborder forces (BSF). And the Indiansview the Bangladesh Rifles as a problem.One former senior Indian intelligenceofficial B Raman wrote a column in the

The BangladeshArmy Massacre



magazine ‘Outlook’ on 27 February, 2009where he said the Bangladesh Rifles’anti-Indian stance is an obstacle to theIndia-Bangladesh relationship. TheBangladesh Rifles is trained by the Armyof Bangladesh because of which it doesthe job very well to the point that theBSF fear the Bangladesh Rifles. Therehave been many incidents of clashesbetween the two forces where the BSFsimply fled from the fight. Thereforeweakening or even destroying theBangladesh Rifles leaves the Bangladeshborder unprotected from Indian BSFaggression. Thirdly as a Muslim country,the armed forces of Bangladesh arealways viewed as a security threat byIndia. The Bangladesh Rifles massacrehas severely harmed the Bangladeshmilitary.

We should also consider the Indianresponse during and after the incident.BSF sends SMS messages during therebellion to soldiers in the BangladeshRifles assuring them of assistance. TheIndian media launches a frenzied attackon Islamic Militants and the Bangladeshopposition parties trying to divert thepeople’s minds. The Indian Army and airforce was kept ready for assisting theHasina government; not in dealing withthe mutiny (the Bangladesh Army iscapable of doing that) but rather to savethe government in case of any threats toits existence. And now the Indiangovernment is making statements thatthe Hasina government has their full

backing and they will not sit idly by ifthere are any threats to it arising fromevents post the mutiny. The Indianmagazine ‘Outlook’ reported that IndianForeign Minister Pranab Mukharjee saidin a closed door meeting of Congressleaders that “... in the current scenario,India is ready to provide any help toBangladesh ...I want to send strongwarnings to those who are trying to

destabilize Sheikh Hasina’s governmentthat if they continue to do this, India willnot remain silent, if necessary, India willdirectly intervene”. In other words theIndian political leadership is preparedfor the fallout of the incident. It seemsthat India wants Sheikh Hasina to reformand restructure Bangladesh Rifles afterthe 25 February incident. Also, ifpossible, they want to reform theBangladesh Army in their favour. As for the timing, at present with theHasina government in power they founda favourable moment to execute theirplan. They found internal forces that willassist them in organizing the event andmore importantly their future plansregarding the re-structuring of theBangladesh Rifles and the Army.Previously when Hasina was in powerthey had executed some of their plans.Before going to the next question let mejust clarify another point here. As youknow in recent years Bangladesh hasgained strategic importance in terms ofregional geo-politics. Right now in theaftermath of the Bangladesh Riflesincident all the imperialist powers areundertaking efforts to advance theirinterests. The US, the British, and India –all are conspiring for control over theBangladesh Army. You know about theFBI and the Scotland Yard’s visit here inthe name of providing so-calledassistance in the investigations. So nowthe issue for us is to expose theconspiracies of all these imperialistenemies of the Ummah.

3. In your press release youmentioned the involvement of elementswithin the Bangladesh government inorchestrating this disaster. You must havestrong arguments to make such a boldand brave allegation. Can you explain?

From the analysis of events it can beeasily understood that the current

Awami league government is playing adubious role from the beginning of theevent. Although the government iscampaigning that it has successfullydealt with the mutiny, we can present ananalogy here in the form of a popularsaying in Bangladesh – the operationwas successful, but the patient died. Thereality is that the mutiny could havebeen put down within an hour or two,but it was allowed to last for two days.The army officers could have beensaved, but they were not. The chain ofcommand in the Bangladesh Rifles hasbeen destroyed and the murderers wereallowed to flee.

I am sure by now you are aware of thequestions being raised by almosteveryone concerned. We raised thesequestions when every one else thoughtit was a mutiny due to some legitimategrievances. The questions that we raisedare very important. It is in our leafletand I will not repeat them here. Thereare many more questions that are beingasked now. Our point is that there is aline that needs to be drawn betweenfailure to deal with the plot on the onehand and complicity on the other hand.How many unanswered questions doyou need for proving complicity? Let usunderstand one very important point –those ministers who went to the spot tonegotiate with the rebels are wellknown agents of India. They brought therebels to meet the PM and no recordabout these people was noted downwhereas we know the tight securityprocedures that are followed beforeanyone can get close to the PM’s office,let alone sit down and talk with the PM.Furthermore one of these ministersmakes a public statement two days afterthe event that millions of taka was spentin planning and executing theconspiracy while investigations had not


It is a part of the government’s ploy to save the conspirators.Nobody believes it. It was an attempt to divert people’sattention and it miserably failed as people were not fooled atall. The politicians, intellectuals, media, and business leadershave rejected this idea openly and publicly.


even started. This is nothing but a ployby the government to put the blame onother than the real culprits. Your readerswill be interested to know that thegovernment has so far prevented theminister from being questioned as to hissource for that information.

4. It appears the governmentbelieves that Islamic militants areresponsible. How credible is this?

It is a part of the government’s ploy tosave the conspirators. Nobody believesit. It was an attempt to divert people’sattention and it miserably failed aspeople were not fooled at all. Thepoliticians, intellectuals, media, andbusiness leaders have rejected this ideaopenly and publicly. The minister whomade the statement has now backed offfrom his statement due to the publicbacklash. We all know the crusaders andtheir agents are carrying out a viciouscampaign against Islam throughout theworld and they look for any opportunityto advance that goal.

5. Many of your members havebeen arrested and charged. Can youexplain why they have been arrestedand your views of the charges?

31 of our members and activists havebeen arrested for distributing leaflets.Cases have been filed against them onthe charge of attempting to cause a riot;attempting to create mutiny in the army,and attempting to harm relationshipswith friendly states. These charges arereally untenable. There is nothing in theleaflet to justify it. We simply invited thepeople to resist the Indian plot todestroy our army and the BangladeshRifles and take the government to taskfor its mysterious role. The governmentundertook this oppressive action exactlybecause of this i.e. we exposed thegovernment and their masters. They areafraid of our ideology i.e. Islam, whichcommands the proclamation of the truthopenly and bravely without an iota offear even if the whole people are afraidand silent.

6. Hizb ut-Tahrir have launched acampaign on this issue. What do youwant to achieve from your campaignand what is your action plan?

HT is a global political party working forre-establishment of the Khilafah. All ouractivities are aimed at achieving thatgoal. We undertake the work of culturingthe Muslims with the Islamic thoughtsand opinions. We also expose theconspiracies of the colonialist statesagainst the Muslims. As well as this wetake the rulers in the Muslim countriesto task for their failure, negligence andsubservience to the imperialist enemies.This is what we aim to achieve from thiscampaign i.e. expose the imperialistenemies and their agents so that thepeople reject them and at the same timecreate public opinion about the need forthe Khilafah.

As for our action plan we are continuingwith various programmes making thepeople aware of the conspiracy. We aredoing political activities such asdemonstrations, posters, etc. We arecontacting the people, for example theteachers, doctors, imams and the masspeople through interactions in publicplaces such as mosques, markets,schools, and so on. We are holdingdiscussions with influential people inthe society. As part of that we organizeda roundtable discussion on the 18th ofMarch which was attended by many keyfigures in the country’s intellectual andpolitical arena. We have also produced asmall booklet presenting our analysis ofthe event and how the Khilafah willchallenge the imperialists.

7. What is your message for theMuslims living in the UK?

In general, we need to understand thatour life and provisions are in the hand ofAllah (SWT) to whom we will all return.We have no control over this. We willtake with us nothing from this worldexcept our deeds. Thus our daily livesmust not make us forget our Islamicobligations – the most important ofwhich are the obligation to removethese corrupt rulers and the colonialpowers from the Islamic lands and to re-

establish the Khilafah.

So support the work for Khilafah as youcan. I can make some suggestions. Firstly,those of you who have relatives inBangladesh and make frequent visitshere - inform them about the Khilafahand the work of HTB especially thepoliticians, intellectuals and the media.Second, win over the Bangladeshi mediain the UK so that they publish news ofthe work for Khilafah. This will make thecommunity aware of the Khilafah, whocan then convey the concept to theirfriends and families in Bangladesh. Third,talk to the politicians belonging toBangladeshi based political parties in theUK; they make visits to Bangladesh andhave influence. Fourth, many politiciansand influential people such as writers,journalists, columnists and ulama fromBangladesh visit the UK. Contact them,talk to them and convince them aboutthe Khilafah as the only viablealternative for the multitude of problemsfacing Bangladesh.

Specifically on the Bangladesh Riflesmassacre you need to realize the gravedangers of this conspiracy. I have nowords to describe it. It is one of thebiggest conspiracies in the country’shistory. It is not the issue of one partynor should the issue be looked at frompartisan interests. It is a plot against theBangladesh army – the defenders ofIslam and Muslims, the defenders of thefuture Khilafah. You should protestagainst this and all imperialistconspiracies against the Muslims ofBangladesh. You should apply pressureupon the government of Bangladeshthrough organizing protest actions suchas demonstrating outside the Bangladeshembassy, demanding that thegovernment explains its dubious role inthe so-called mutiny; refrains from itsploy to save the conspirators and alsoreleases our members and supporters.The media should be contacted,information about the conspiracy shouldbe passed to them and they should bemotivated to publish news about it sothat the community is aware of the plot.�



“O you who believe, Obey Allah, ObeyHis Messenger and those in authorityfrom amongst you and if you differthen refer it to Allah and His Messengerif you believe in Allah and the LastDay.” [An-Nisa: 59]

This noble verse in Surah an-Nisa comesafter verse 58 which focused on therulers when they were enjoined to ruleby justice which is none other thanwhat Allah (SWT) has revealed. In thisverse the focus is on the Muslims underthe authority of the rulers and theirresponsibility. In this respect themessage of this ayah is addressed to theUmmah at large and we can learn from itthe following matters:

The verse begins with the verb 'atee'u'('obey') in the imperative form and theobject of obedience is Allah (swt). Theverse then commands 'Atee'u' (obey)and this time it is referring to theMessenger (Sallallahu alaihi wassalam).The repetition of the word 'obey' andthe order indicates the two basicreference points that Muslims have andthey are the Qur'an and Sunnah.Therefore, anything in contravention ofQur'an and Sunnah must be disobeyedand anything from the Qur'an andSunnah must be obeyed. This is the

principle upon which Muslims are toldto live by and this is the principle onwhich Muslims are instructed to viewtheir rulers. Here the word for rulers orthose in authority is ulul amr. It is notrestricted to the Khaleefah, but alsoincludes the walis, wazeers and all thosewho have authority, especially since theword has been used in the plural (ululamr and not waliyul amr which is in thesingular). It is interesting that the ayahdoes not repeat the verb 'atee'u' when itcomes to the rulers as it did in respectto Allah and His Messenger, which is anadditional indication alongside the clearverses and hadith which state that rulersmust obey Allah and His Messenger intheir ruling and exercise of authority. Forexample the Messenger (saw) said:'There is no obedience to thedisobedience of the Creator.' [SahihBukhari, Volume 9: Hadith 363] Herethere is an absolute prohibition offollowing an order that goes against theorder of Allah (swt), whoever makes thatorder. This hadith came specifically inthe context of authority and ruling. Itsmafhum or implied meaning indicatesthat just as the person cannot obey aruler who disobeys Allah (swt) so in thesame way, a ruler or amir cannot order,enact laws or rule by anything that is inviolation of what Allah (swt) has ordered.

Consider for example the followinghadith: It has been reported that Ali (ra)said, "The Messenger of Allah sent atroop under the command of a manfrom Al-Ansar. When they left, he becameangry with them for some reason andsaid to them, `Has not the Messenger ofAllah commanded you to obey me' Theysaid, `Yes.' He said, `Collect some wood,'and then he started a fire with the wood,


The Basis ofAuthority in theIslamic State

Culture


saying, `I command you to enter thefire.' The people almost entered the fire,but a young man among them said, `Youran away from the Fire to Allah'sMessenger. Therefore, do not rush untilyou go back to Allah's Messenger, and ifhe commands you to enter it, then enterit.' When they went back to Allah'sMessenger, they told him what hadhappened, and the Messenger said, Hadyou entered it, you would never havedeparted from it. Obedience is only inrighteousness.'' (Reported by BukhariVolume 9, Book 91, Number 363:). Herethe Messenger (saw) stated thatobedience is only in the 'maroof' andnot in the 'munkar'. So the one inauthority cannot command anything butma'ruuf and people cannot obeyanything but maroof. What is 'ma'roof iswhat Islam has defined as good andmunkar is what Islam has defined as evil.It is not left to the discretion of man todecide these matters.

The verse also obliges the obedience tothe command of the Messenger (saw)and links that to the rulers. As long asthe rulers or those in authority obey theMessenger then there is the obedienceto him, otherwise there is no obedience.It is ludicrous after saying that there isno obedience in the disobedience to theCreator that there can be obedience in

the disobedience to the Messenger asthe Ayah obliges obedience to Allah andHis Messenger. That is why theMessenger of Allah, may Allah bless himand grant him peace, said in a hadithreported by Abu Hurairah, 'Whoeverobeys me has obeyed Allah and whoeverdisobeys me has disobeyed Allah.Whoever obeys the amir has obeyed meand whoever disobeys the amir hasdisobeyed me'" [Agreed upon] As for thestatement 'whoever obeys the amir hasobeyed me and whoever disobeys theamir has disobeyed me' in the abovehadith or the following hadith: "Anyonewho dislikes something from his amirshould be patient. Anyone who abandonsobedience to the amir for even a shorttime dies the death of the Jahiliyya(ignorance)." [Agreed upon] This doesnot mean their absolute obedience tothe rulers. These hadiths are talking ofnot rebelling against the rulers due totheir misappropriation of the people’srights and not about obeying the rulersin the matters which are a clearviolation of the Shariah. Rather, whenthe ruler commands a clear munkar theMuslim must disobey that command andcannot say he was following orders.

The verse then concludes that if there isa difference over a matter between theMuslims and their rulers then the final

arbiter must be Allah and His Messengerie the Qur'an and Sunnah. It states: “ifyou differ then refer it to Allah and HisMessenger if you believe in Allah and theLast Day.” Just as the young man in theabove hadith disputed with his Amirwhen he commanded them to enter thefire and referred the matter to theMessenger, we are also obliged to referto the Islamic reference point ie theQuran and Sunnah when there is adispute. The last words of the ayahenjoin on the believers the importanceof referring to Allah and His Messengerin ruling, by drawing attention to thefact that not to do so is a negation ofiman and hence it says: '...if you believein Allah and the Last Day.”

This is how the Sahabah (ra) understoodthis matter and nothing shows this moreclearly than the speech of Abu Bakr as-Siddique when he assumed the post ofKhaleefah, he said: "Help me, if I am inthe right; set me right, if I am in thewrong. The weak among you shall bestrong with me until, Allah willing, hisrights have been vindicated. The strongamong you shall be weak with me until,if Allah wills, I have taken what is duefrom him. Obey me as long as I obeyAllah and His Prophet; when I disobeyHim and his Prophet, obey me not."

Thus, we can see from the above ayahthe basis of ruling, ie the commandingthe good and forbidding the evil by therulers and obedience to them must be inobedience to Allah and His Messenger.This means that the basis of the IslamicState is Islam and none other. The stateof the Muslims must be Islamic, ie whereAllah and His Messenger are obeyedboth by the rulers and by those who areruled. It must be a state where theMuslims refer to Allah and His Messengerand this is a requirement of their beliefin Allah and the Last Day.�


Culture


Falling economic activity in one or moreindustries or sectors is not uncommoneven during more general periods ofsustained economic growth. As anexample manufacturing employment inthe UK fell from 4.5 million to 3.2million (1) between 1997 and 2007 – a10 year period over which UK-wideeconomic growth rose by a robust 3%per annum on average in real terms (2). It is however rare for a sub sector tocause the whole economy to go intorecession. However, this is exactly what’shappened during the current financialcrisis and subsequent recession. The collapse of high risk ‘sub-prime’lending in the USA exposed the fragilityand global interdependence of financial

markets. The failure of this specific areaof finance initiated a chain reaction thatresulted in, until recently, highlyprofitable century-old global financialinstitutions filing for bankruptcy,sometimes, overnight. In the UK,Northern Rock, a bank from the NorthEast of England, went bankrupt, afterwhich other banks were kept afloat onlyas a result of Government bail-outs andguarantees. With domestic andinternational financial sectors in turmoil,the many heavily indebted businessesfound it difficult to raise funds whiledebt-ridden individuals could no longerafford to borrow to financeunsustainable consumption levels. Thesubsequent fall in demand for consumer

goods led to production cut-backs andrising unemployment. In the fourthquarter of 2008 the UK economy wasofficially in recession - defined as twoquarters of negative economic growth.This is how the casino financialeconomy initiated and caused adevastating recession in the realeconomy.

DEBT FUELLED GROWTHThe finance sector (comprising mainlyof banking, finance and insuranceindustries) has grown in significance inthe last decade. While the manufacturingsector was in terminal decline, jobs infinance grew from 5 million to 6.6million between 1997 and 2007 (1),accounting for 1 in 5 of all jobs in theUK. It is no coincidence that debt levelsover this period also surged.

Britain’s total debt exploded during theeconomic boom. The total debt owed bygovernment, businesses and individuals –commonly known as gross external debt– rose from 1.7 trillion in 1997 to £5.7million in 2007, an increase of 238% (3). It was this astounding growth in debtfrom all sections of society thatpropelled continuous economic growthover the last decade. At the end of 2007,Britain’s total external debt stood at over400% of GDP (the total value of goodsand services produced by the UK) ofapproximately £1.5 trillion per annum.That’s equivalent to a debt of £94,000for every man, woman and child in the


RECESSION - When the casino economymeets the real economy

Arif Samad


UK. Indeed, this was in 2007 before theonset of the financial crisis and the bankbail-outs which have been largely fundedby government borrowing. Given theestimated £1.5 trillion in newgovernment debt to prop up banksduring 2008 (4) UK debt per capita isestimated to comfortably exceed£100,000.

Household spending, which accounts fortwo thirds of all expenditure in the UKeconomy, was financed by cheap andeasy credit following the deregulation ofbanking during the 1980s. When peopleran out of income and savings to buy

goods and services they simplyborrowed. Banks encouraged thespending binge by offering ever greatercredit to ever more riskier debtors. Banks made huge profits, with bankersearning colossal bonuses, and justifiedsuch lending arguing their new businessmodels had diversified debtor risk bypackaging riskier debt in the form ofcollateralised debt obligations (orCDO’s) and other such instruments.Governments encouraged these‘gambling’ practices, no doubt allured bythe prospects of greater tax revenuesfrom the extraordinary profit-makingbanking sector and the not coincidentalsimultaneous property and asset booms,by further loosening banking regulation(5) to accommodate new banking‘business models’ BANKING – THE FALSE ECONOMYBust followed boom in common withthe 1970s, 1980s and 1990s as assetbubbles (over priced property and sharevalues) burst. However unlike the recentrecessions, but not for the first time, therecession was associated with a collapsein the financial sector.

So-called financial assets like CDO’s,

mortgaged debt obligation, and creditdefault swaps could not find willingbuyers and proved to be effectivelyworthless, resulting in huge shortfalls inbank balance sheets. The previouslyacclaimed highly efficient bankingbusiness model proved unworkable ascredit become scarce (liquidity crisis)when banks stopped lending to oneanother because each was protecting itsown assets and no one trusted the valueof the collateral they previously lauded.Banks worth multi-billions of dollars inmarket capitalisation filed forbankruptcy overnight as share values fellwhen investors realised the false and

hollow nature of banking assets. This hada negative feedback effect as bankingstocks and shares were the very ‘assets’that the financial sector relied upon toprop up company balance sheets and somarket capitalisation was furtherundermined. Together these eventsprecipitated a systemic collapse of thewhole interdependent financial system. More banks teetered on the edge ofcollapse. Free market economists,capitalist thinkers and politicalcommentators paradoxically yetvociferously argued ‘banks were too bigto fail’ implying the ramifications ofbanking failures were too monstrous toimagine. The government obliged theirfriends and close allies in banking andcommitted trillions of tax payer moneyto fully bailing-out the banking sectorusing loans, government guarantees andthe buying up of so-called toxic(worthless) banking assets despiteundermining competitiveness in thesector and encouraging banks to behaveeven more recklessly.

The financial sector had epitomisedcapitalism in terms of values, culture,policies and outlook more than any

other sector in the economy. Thesystemic and fatal collapse of financewas thus a clear and damningindictment of capitalism itself.

FINANCE AND THE REAL ECONOMYWith the finance sector barely able tostand on its own feet how was it tocontinue to fuel the debt riddeneconomy. Despite central banksindividually and collectively loweringinterest rates (the cost of capital orborrowing) and pumping trillions ofpublic money into the financial marketto kick start lending, banks simplyhoarded the funds to cover for theirworthless collateralised assets whichseverely depleted their balance sheets. Businesses and households that hadrelied on borrowing to fund theirspending, found credit more difficult toaccess. Since credit was fuellingeconomic growth this directly impactedon the real economy as spending ongoods and services dropped, prices fell,and with it company profitability,thereby forcing businesses to cut backproduction and staff.

The biggest falls in economic activityhave been in consumer goods: cars and‘white goods’ such as washing machinesand fridges. These are primarily financedby credit and in recent years loanagreements have been designed to bemore manageable and more readilyavailable to entice an ever greaternumber of households to continue tobuy what they don’t need so thatcompanies can maintain high and moreprofitable production growth schedules. Though this model of capitalisteconomic growth is clearlyunsustainable, it has devastatingconsequences, as it causes a downwardnegative economic spiral. Whenproduction falls unemployment riseswhich in turn causes lower spending ongoods and services, lower productionand more unemployment. The economicdecline quickly becomes morewidespread and more prevailing,generating its own negative momentum. At the start of 2009 unemployment inthe UK officially rose to 2 million and isforecast to rise to 3 million before theend of the year. The UK economy is


The UK economy is presently forecast to contract by 3%in 2009 and remain in decline in 2010. These areprobably optimistic forecasts given that official forecastshave been downgraded several times already since thestart of the crisis.


presently forecast to contract by 3% in2009 and remain in decline in 2010.These are probably optimistic forecastsgiven that official forecasts have beendowngraded several times already sincethe start of the crisis.

HUMAN CONSEQUENCES OF THERECESSIONARY CRISISCapitalists view recessions in cold andcalculated terms quantifying only theloss (destruction) of wealth andproperty - the number of jobs lost andbusiness closures. However, recessionshave huge social as well as economicconsequences. Presently, unemploymentis rising throughout the UK, across allsectors and industries. A loss oflivelihood has huge ramifications forindividuals, families, communities andsociety at large. Some communities willbe blighted for decades as in previousrecessions - for example coal miningcommunities remain largely ruined fromthe recession in the 1980s . Tens ofthousands of families unable to pay theirdebts have already lost their homes andpossessions. Some have even committedsuicide unable to bear the consequencesof their debts and a loss of livelihood.Job insecurity exists even among thosewho are still employed who fear thatthey may be next to be made redundant.During recessions government taxreceipts drop while expenditure risesdue to benefit payments to theunemployed and poor. Central and localgovernment claw back funding fromelsewhere by cutting back expenditureon schools and hospitals, assistance forthe elderly and help for the weak andvulnerable - for example cut backs inlocal meals-on-wheels for the elderly andless funding for local libraries.Economically strained times lead toincreasing demands on public serviceslike police and hospitals fromaccelerating crime and rising stresslevels and a general physical and mentaldeterioration in health. Familyrelationships tend to strain duringrecessionary times with potentiallypainful and lasting impacts on children.Thus recessions spread insecurity andinstability contributing to a plethora ofsocial ills.

ISLAM'S ECONOMIC APPROACH In Islam the success of the economy isnot judged by the size of GDP. High GDPin the UK, equating to income per headof £24,000 per annum, among thehighest in the world, conceals theheavily debt ridden economy.Importantly, GDP or income per headsays little about the distribution ofwealth. This is exemplified by the factthat according to government datanearly 3 million children in the UK livein relative poverty (6) in spite of highGDP levels and growth rates.

In contrast to Capitalism, the success ofthe economic model in Islam is judgedby its ability to secure the satisfaction ofthe basic needs of every citizen.

Bukhari narrated from Ibn Umar: TheProphet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said:"The Imam is in charge (ra'i) and he isresponsible for his citizens."

The Prophet (saw) also said: "Do youhave, son of Adam, of your propertyexcept that which you ate andconsumed, that which you wore andexhausted, and that which you donatedand kept (for yourself)?"

Islam’s focus is on the real economywhich is the wealth creating aspect ofany economy. Finance in Islam is not anend in itself as there is no interest (Riba). “That is because they say: "Trading isonly like Riba,'' whereas Allah haspermitted trading and forbidden Riba”[Surah al-Baqarah]

While finance plays an important role inbusiness and economics in Islam it isexclusively (6) in the context ofpartnerships where the financialcontributing partner(s) are involvedwith the ‘body’ (those running the dayto day business) partners aiming togenerate a profit from their businessactivities or sharing the loss if thebusiness fails.

In contrast to capitalism, finance in Islamis intrinsically tied to the real economyand does not become an industry initself. This eliminates the potential forgenerating self-destructive financial

instruments that have been so pivotal inthe collapse of the capitalist financialsector.

The prohibition of interest works intandem with the ruling that themonetary unit in Islam is effectively thegold and silver standard and thisprohibits credit creation. Thus themonetary base of the economy in Islamchanges only with growth in the realeconomy through the creation of wealthor increase in productivity. Thisminimises inflationary pressures;provides economic stability and ensuressustainable growth without thedestructive boom and bust cycle.

CONCLUSIONCapitalism’s flaws and systemic failureshave been clearly exposed by thecurrent crisis. The capitalist economicmodel, therefore, does not deserve to beemulated by the Muslim world. Bycontrast, the Islamic ideology and rulingsprovide real practical solutions to theeconomic problems of the day. TheIslamic economic system with its focuson the real (not financial) economy haswithstood the test of time, and with themoney supply tied to gold and silverprovides a model of sustainable andresponsible growth, with distribution ofthe nations wealth at its core.�



The old saying “power tends to corrupt”has certainly proved true for British MP’sin recent weeks and months. Whilstthousands of people lose their homesduring the recession, MP’s have beenprofiting by buying and refurbishingsecond homes at the taxpayer’s expense,then selling them for a hefty tax-free profit.They have then used the profits to buy anew home to restart the whole process.They have been found to be charginggardening bills, maintenance of theirswimming pools and basic food items andtoiletries to the taxpayer. When exposedthey offered little remorse, claiming thatthey had all acted ‘within the rules’.

The most startling case was that of JacquiSmith, the British Home Secretary whosehusband was found to be watchingpornography paid for by the Britishtaxpayer! She was followed by Hazel

Blears, Michael Gove, David Davis and ahost of others whose names were exposedin the scandal,

The attitude of British politicians towardstheir abuse of public funds was summedup by MP Harry Cohen, who topped theexpenses chart by claiming a massive£310,000, on a second-home allowance. Hesaid, “When MPs were given this allowancethey were told "Go and spend it, boys" andthat is what I have done. It is my right.”When challenged to clean up the system,the House of Common’s Speaker MichaelMartin was reported to have said “I did notcome into politics not to take what isowed to me.'

This ‘right’ to abuse taxpayers’ money isnot confined to simply one or two MP’s. Aninvestigation by the Sunday Telegraphfound that 65 MP’s are claiming expenses

for a second home while earning rentalincome from letting out a third. Thesepoliticians – one in ten of all MPs –claimedbetween them almost £6 million sincerecords on expenses began in 2001, anaverage of £85,000 each.

The Mail on Sunday summed up nicely theactual problem with British politicians.“The next most startling aspect of theproblem is how few MPs – supposed to bebeyond reproach – seem to have anystrong sense of right and wrong, or anyability to resist temptation. People whosejob it is to make the law are plunderingthe public purse because there is nothingin the rules to say they should not doso...Men and women who went intopolitics with honest intentions see all thisgoing on around them and, unless they areexceptionally strong-willed, are swiftlydrawn into the swamp of tax-fundedgreed.”

It’s the core western values of freedomand benefit which give rise to no “strongsense of right and wrong, or ability toresist temptation” that is at the root ofgovernment corruption not just in Britainbut the entire world today including theMuslim world.

When Westminster politics is riddled withcorruption how can anyone believe thatthese Western governments can ever bringa corruption free and accountablegovernment in the Muslim world?

In Pakistan the current President AsifZardari, the latest ‘ally in the war on terror’,was previously imprisoned for corruptionand siphoning off public funds, so much sothat he was given the title “Mr 10%”. Nowhe is President of the country who knowswhat percentage he will be known by atthe end of his tenure?

SO HOW DID ISLAM ENSURE ACORRUPTION FREE POLITICS?Whilst politics according to the westernway of life is about power, ego, showbizand material benefit emulated so well bythe long list of rulers in our countries,Islam established politics as one of thehighest responsibilities.

Politicians in Islam, whether they holdgovernment posts or not, have acompletely different viewpoint towardspolitics and their role within the state.Politics in Islam concerns looking after the


The CorruptValues of Britishpolitics

Abdul-Kareem Newell


affairs of people. The politician is the onewho is a servant of the Ummah. They donot take any government post with the aimof achieving personal benefit. Rather theysee their position as a responsibility thatthey will be questioned about on the Dayof Judgment.

It is narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: “Aman gave as a gift to the Messenger ofAllah (salallahu alaihi wa-salam) a slave

who was called Mid’am. Whilst Mid’am wasbringing down a saddle for the Messengerof Allah (salallahu alaihi wa-salam), anarrow came out of nowhere and killedhim. The people said, “How fortunate he is!Paradise is his,” but the Messenger of Allah(salallahu alaihi wa-salam) said, “No, by theOne in Whose hand is my soul, the cloakwhich he took from the war-booty on theday of Khaybar before the booty had beenshared out will burn him with fire.” Whenthe people heard that, a man came andbrought one or two shoelaces to theProphet (salallahu alaihi wa-salam) andsaid, “A shoelace of fire” or “Two shoelacesof fire.” [Bukhari & Muslim]

The war-booty (ghaneema) is one of therevenues of the Islamic State and part ofthe public funds. If someone was punishedsimply for stealing a piece of cloth fromthe public funds, what about the rulers inthe Muslim world who have stolen$billions of oil and natural resources fromthe ummah?

So the first and foremost way to resolvethe corruption in our countries is toremove the corrupt political culture that isdominant in our societies. Today thecorrupt system ensures that only the mostevil, corrupt and ruthless people win inthe so called ‘free and fair’ democraticelections overseen by the west. Thecorrupt political system that breedscorrupt politicians needs to be uprootedand a new system of politics establishedwhere only those sincere, trustworthy andupright individuals who have a trackrecord of sacrifice for the ummah and areknown in society for their iman and tawqa,run for positions of responsibility within

the state, seeking only the Pleasure of Allahand the pleasure of being a servant of thepeople. Islam recognises that human beings arenot angels and will commit sins. If apolitician becomes overwhelmed byshaytan and abuses his position orcommits oppression against the peoplehow does the Islamic system deal withthis?

Building on al-Mawardi’s classical work Al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, Hizb ut-Tahrir’s bookNidham ul-Hukm fil-Islam describes ingreat detail two institutions that are taskedwith addressing government corruption.The first institution is an independent,powerful, judicial court called theMahkamat al-Mazaalim (Court of UnjustActs). The second is an elected house ofpeoples’ representatives called the Majlisul-Ummah (Council of the Ummah), whosedecisions on certain affairs of state (notlegislation) the Khaleefah isconstitutionally obliged to accept.

The Mahkamat al-Mazaalim contains judgeswhose sole responsibility and expertise isgovernment oppression (Mazlema),constitutional law and legislation. Unlike astandard court the judge (Qadi al-Mazaalim) has investigatory powers andcan initiate a court case without a plaintiff.This court has the power to obligegovernment officials including theKhaleefah to pay back any money theytook from public funds. Mismanagement ofthe public properties such as oil wealth orthe imposition of unjust taxation on thepeople can all be investigated by this courtand practically resolved through issuing ajudgement that the officials must abide by.

Ibn ‘Umar said that when ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab was in need, he used to go to theman in charge of the Bait ul-Mal and seek aloan from him. Often he might be indifficulty and the man in charge of thepublic treasury would come to him,seeking repayment of the debt and wouldoblige him to pay it, and ‘Umar would beevasive to him. Then often ‘Umar wouldreceive his stipend and so pay his debt.

[Suyuti, Tarikh al-Khulafa]

The Majlis ul-Ummah is comprised ofelected representatives of the people whoare voted in every five years. Theserepresentatives can be men, women,Muslim or non-Muslim. Accountability ofgovernment officials is one of the Majlis’scentral tasks. It has the power to hold anygovernment official accountable on allmatters related to the state, and some ofthe Majlis’s decisions will be binding onthe Khaleefah to enact.

In addition to the above institutions, Islamputs a burden on every individual insociety to take care about the publicaffairs. Islam encourages and obliges oneach and every Muslim to enjoin the goodand forbid the munkar in society.

Furthermore Allah (SWT) encouragesgroups and parties to be established withinthe society to enjoin the good and forbidthe munkar. “And let there be from amongyou a group(s) who invite to goodness,and command right conduct and forbidwhat is evil. Such are they who aresuccessful.” [Ayat surah Al-Imran 104]

The famous example of the man whoaccounted Umar al-Khattab about thelength of his shirt indicates theconsciouness within people to account therulers and hold them to task.

Government corruption in Britain or theMuslim world can never be resolved whilstthe politicians hold on to the Capitalistvalues of freedom and benefit. No matterhow many anti-corruption mechanismsthey put in place, politicians will alwaysfind clever ways to hide their abuses.

Only when sincere Islamic politicians takethe reins of power in the Muslim world,and establish a righteous Islamicgovernment, the Khilafah will we again seerulers like Umar bin Abdul-Aziz who wasso careful not to abuse the public fundsthat he wouldn’t even use a candle paidfor from the Bait ul-Mal for his ownpersonal use.�


Today the corrupt system ensures that only the mostevil, corrupt and ruthless people win in the so called‘free and fair’ democratic elections overseen by the west.


Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, Suite 301, 28 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3SSTel: 07074 192 400 - www.hizb.org.uk - [email protected]

hizb.org.uk


Documents

Supporting Dictatorship