Unforgivable Saudi crimes

by Zafar Bangash August, 2013 The House of Saud continues to cause immense damage to the Ummah. Their wrath is especially reserved for women and expatriate workers. They do not want women to be seen, only used by lecherous Saudi men. The worldwide Muslim Ummah faces a serious dilemma vis-à-vis the Saudi rulers. They have been in occupation of the Arabian Peninsula since 1932 when they invaded the Hijaz with the two holy cities of Makkah and Madinah and declared their desert kingdom. While claiming to be governed by the teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the noble Messenger (pbuh), the fact that they call themselves a kingdom ruled by a king goes against the basic tenets of Islam and the teachings of the Qur’an. The noble Messenger (pbuh) and his illustrious successors never called themselves kings or princes. Nor did they allow hereditary rule as is imposed in “Saudi” Arabia. This is one, albeit major, problem. The other is the wholesale destruction of the historical sites of Islam under the guise of expansion of the Haramayn (Makkah and Madinah) as well as modernization to make room for the ever-growing number of pilgrims. Muslims worldwide look at this vandalism in stunned silence and appear helpless to prevent such destruction. Is it necessary to build five-star hotels or open McDonald’s restaurants and Starbucks coffee shops by demolishing the home of Khadijah (ra), the noble Messenger’s (pbuh) beloved wife and companion for 25 years, and the house of his friend Abu Bakr Siddiq (ra)? Entire mountains are being wiped out to make way for steel and concrete monstrosities called modern buildings. On what authority do the Saudis indulge in such vandalism? There is also another aspect of the Saudi conduct inherited from their bedouin tradition that has nothing to do with Islam: the total control of women to the point of locking them out of life altogether. Women must be covered head to toe, must be accompanied by a male guardian if they wish to go outside the home and they cannot drive cars. Saudi court preachers argue that if they were allowed to drive, it would encourage promiscuity. Perhaps the Muslim women that drive cars elsewhere in the Muslim world are all promiscuous! Are Saudi men really all that pious?

In 2010, a Saudi preacher came up with a ludicrous solution to the dilemma of women not driving. Obviously they must be driven by a male relative. Often, such a relative is not available (Saudi men are bone lazy and do little or no work). Most Saudi families have chauffers; these are all expatriate men. Since they are not related to women they are required to drive, a Saudi preacher suggested that if the dirver were to drink the breast milk of the woman, he would become like her son (what if the woman is not married?). This raised questions about the method of consuming such milk: through the bottle or straight from the source! One female Saudi commentator wrote: instead of going into such convoluted arguments, why not allow the women to drive? Saudi women, more than half the population, constitute only 17% of the workforce. According to the 2009 Global Gender Gap Report, Saudi Arabia ranks below such other Muslim countries as Kyrgyzstan, Gambia and Indonesia. Activist Wajeha al-Huwaider compares the condition of Saudi women to slavery. If a widowed woman wishes to remarry, she must seek the permission of her son! Saudi preachers have also made other idiotic suggestions like ziwaj al-misyar (marriage while traveling). What this means is that a man can take a temporary wife because he is away from home. The “temporary wife” has no rights afforded to a wife in a normal marriage contract. She stays at her parents’ house and is visited by the “temporary husband” at his convenience. This practice has become quite common in Saudi Arabia where men take additional wives without telling their “regular” wives (most Saudi men have more than one wife, often three or four; the founder of the Saudi kingdom, Abdulaziz ibn Saud had 23 wives from whom he sired 37 children!). Since “temporary wives” stay at their parents’ homes, this saves the man embarrassment in front of his “regular” wives. The fatwas dished out by Saudi court preachers are meant to keep women under control and give men a license to indulge in every obnoxious behavior. Can the Muslim Ummah remain silent or indifferent in the face of such crimes committed in the name of Islam?

US and Israel on the Iran war redux

By Zainab Cheema
Martyred Major General Hassan Moqaddam, who was responsible for industrial research to ensure the Revolutionary Guards’ self-sufficiency in armaments, specialized in artillery during the Iraq-Iran War of the 1980s before founding the country’s ballistic missile program.


In the face of its collapsing economy and spiraling domestic unrest, the US is blithely proceeding with its blueprint of remaking world cartography. After dispatching Muammar Qaddafi in a hail of gunmetal, US imperialists are confronting the Syrian stumbling block, item No. 2 on its regime change wish-list. With Bashar al-Asad clinging to power after 10 months of counter-revolutionary mayhem, US and Israeli eyes wend once more to the geopolitical foe holding the program of reprogramming the Muslim East at bay — Iran.
The media is humming with the US and Israel’s latest drumbeat for war against Iran. The reverberations measure the pitch of exasperation at Iran’s resistance to Pentagon Inc.’s desire to have open access to Syria. Recently, the US House Foreign Relations Committee passed the Iran Threat Reduction Act of 2011, which forbids any member of the US government to have any contact “in an official or unofficial capacity” with a member of the Iranian government. While the esteemed Representatives might be impervious to irony, the shade of the Iran Contra Affair of the 1980s lent a certain humorous cast to this little bit of stage comedy. Enjoying 349 co-sponsors from both parties, the bill signaled the die-hard determination of the US Congressmen to love Israel and hate Iran, in full view of the AIPAC lobbyists.


US political observers noted the folly of passing legislation that cuts off contact with the “enemy,” as Iran is fondly dubbed in US political circles. Diplomats Thomas Pickering and William Luers spelled out their sentiments: “Besides raising serious constitutional issues… this preposterous law would make it illegal for the US to know its enemy.” CIA analyst and Georgetown University professor Paul Pillar pointed out the self-importance behind the gesture, even as he brandished imperialist-chic Raybans dividing the world into a bifocal “us” and “them”: “This legislation is another illustration of the tendency to think of diplomacy as some kind of reward for the other guy, rather than what it really is: a tool for our side.”


Then there is Israel’s threat to nuke Iran’s nuclear facilities, launched in concert with a double Molotov cocktail — a Stuxnet like computer virus attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Mossad bomb blast at an Iranian military base which killed 16 Revolutionary Guards and Hassan Moqaddam, the architect of Iran’s missile defense systems. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak preened visibly after the Moqaddam killing, declaring: “it would be desirable if [such blasts] multiply,” while Iranian students sent a counter-message by forming a human chain around Iran’s nuclear facilities.


US and Israeli saber-rattling comes on the heels of a rather contrived IAEA report, which gravely noted that Iran’s beleaguered nuclear energy program is indeed geared toward building a nuclear weapon. The rhetoric of the IAEA’s missive matched so exquisitely with press releases whipped up by Netan-yahu’s office that one wonders whether the Israeli Prime Minister didn’t write it for the UN agency. The implications of Netanyahu’s influence over the UN and the other bodies of international legitimacy — rather hollowed, as events in the world streets underwrite their irrelevance — are amusing, especially considering the recent conversation about Netanyahu exchanged by his nearest and dearest allies.


At the G-8 economic forum in Cannes on November 2 attended by Sarkozy and Obama, the French President turned to Barack and whispered to him: “I cannot stand him (Netanyahu). He is a liar!” Obama quickly returned: “You are fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!” This exchange occurred shortly after it was leaked that Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, told her cabinet: “every word that leaves Netanyahu’s mouth is a lie.” So, by consensus of the triumvirate of Israel’s die-hard friends — Binyamin Netanyahu is a liar.


The exposure over this interesting exchange was more or less brushed aside by the US corporate-owned media. Israel, the convergence of the geostrategic and racial interests in subjugating the Muslim East, remains sacrosanct. Yet, the stress fractures are clear to see. That is, the global political class managing hegemony is not immune to the push-pull forces of resistance and the gravitational drag of its crumbling systems of rule.


According to the story, Netanyahu was exposed after an open microphone gave reporters an ear to the exchange. But it is entirely possible that Netan-yahu was given a pointed reprimand by the allies exasperated by his eagerness to humiliate them rather than put a sophisticated face on his belligerence. His penchant for openly flouting US politicians (Obama in particular), and arrive barreling in on state visits designed to showcase his political invulnerability in the United States led even Tom Friedman of the New York Times to rhetorically slap him on the wrist.


One feels for the once-complacent Friedman — while alarmed by Israel’s fall from grace in world opinion, he has been even more alarmed by the tarnish cast on the US’s reputation by its Faustian contract to underwrite Netanyahu’s actions. Ergo, the chess-game played by Pentagon Inc. is no longer a perpetual checkmate — the board is opening up for new moves, new arrangements of outcomes.


Understandably, this is a rather terrifying prospect for Pentagon Inc. It is rather exhausting to fight a global war against everything ad infinitum — precisely what the US signed on to do with its borderless, endless War on Terror. Even as AFRICOM expands its trophies from Libya, Sudan, and Somalia, Iran’s network of influence across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq threatens the motherlode of Pentagon military bases — Israel itself. Popular resistance in Iraq to continued US presence erodes US expectations that they will be able to “renew” their mandate of occupation at will. Drone aircraft in Iraq are relocated to Turkey. Syria counters (even if just barely) both Pentagon-funded covert militias and State Department campaigns to smear it as violating the human rights of its civilians. Hizbullah remains the flagrant thorn defying efforts to pluck the tantalizing Lebanon.


Not to mention Israel’s strategic defeat in its prisoner swap with Gaza — nearly 1,000 Palestinian prisoners were exchanged for captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, which cast an ironic light over Netanyahu’s vehement declarations to never deal with Hamas, while boosting Hamas’ popularity through the region. Zionist networks balked at the humiliation, in response ramping up threats of Israel’s impending attack on Iran. An exemplary newspaper headline for the conservative newspaper Washington Times blared: “Israeli prisoner swap may be prelude to attack on Iran.” That is, even as Israel “keeps a low profile” (hiding in the napalm-scented apron of Pentagon Inc), it subcontracts the Tarzan chest-beating to the US media and UN agencies.


The US is rather in a bind. Seemingly, all roads for this gaudy military parade lead to Iran. For now, Pentagon Inc. is proceeding by covert operations, public relations brawls, and psychological warfare. It is comforting to distract oneself from economic breakdowns, public rage, and Occupy Wall Streets — and generals do love a good war. Iran may be a strategic threat, but some of the responses are downright simplistic (Paul Pillar bewailing the ridiculousness of the US legislation to bar anyone ever speaking to a member of the Iranian government comes to mind). Simplistic thinking is a sign of old age, when one loses the power to form complex thoughts, adapt to change, and make rational decisions. It is as subtle as elevator music — with the march onto the promised glories of Carthage, every boot step creaks out the tune of senescence.

Uprisings for dignity sweep the Islamic East

Zafar Bangash

The unthinkable has happened in Egypt. The masses have consigned Hosni Mubaak, the most brutal Middle Eastern despot, to the dustbin of history. This became possible only because people shook off the fear that had paralysed them for 30 years. They have also crossed another important landmark: they refused to be provoked by the thugs unleashed by the regime. This would have provided the regime the pretext to unleash its massive firepower and crush the uprising as happened in Algeria 20 years earlier.

Protests have now spread to other parts of the Middle East with people rising up against long-time rulers in Yemen, Jordan, Bahrain, Libya, Algeria, Djibouti and Morocco. The response of the regimes has been equally brutal but people have not been cowed down. If earlier, people kept their heads down and their voices low against state brutality, now they are standing firm and defying the regimes’ shock troops.

Sometimes, seemingly insignificant events can assume global proportions. It was the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi, an unemployed university graduate (not the first in Tunisia) that sparked the uprising forcing the Tunisian dictator general Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali to flee on January 14. According to reports, Ben Ali has since suffered a stroke in exile in Jeddah and is in a coma. If true, he deserves the fate but it would have been better if he were put on trial, something he denied tens of thousands of people during his brutal rule, and face the consequences for his crimes.


The uprising in Tunisia encouraged the Egyptians also to rise up, with protests quickly spreading to other countries as well. This in turn has caused immense panic in the desert kingdom of Saudi Arabia where the ailing old monarch, King Abdullah seems to have lost nerve completely. He is also upset with US President Barack Obama for “abandoning” Mubarak. Abdullah now feels the heat of the desert spreading.

But it is the change in Egypt that has great significance because the country is a leading player in the Islamic East. While influenced by the example of the intrepid Tunisians that surprised everyone, there was an Egyptian element as well involved. Last June, the Egyptian police beat to death Khalid Sa‘id, a 27-year-old internet buff. His crime? He had obtained a video of the police smoking dope that he wanted to post on the internet. He never lived to do so. There were sporadic protests against the killing but the spark was provided when Wael Ghoneim, a young Google executive opened a Facebook account in the name of Khalid Sa‘id, saying “We are all Khalid Sa‘ids”. This mobilized the Egyptian people who felt they had enough of tyranny and would not put up with any more humiliation.

Western commentators have tried to spin the uprisings in terms of people hankering for bread, lower food prices and jobs. While there is some truth to such assertions, what they have deliberately ignored is that the people’s uprising was and is for dignity and honour. They refuse to put up with the humiliations they have been subjected to for decades by their cowardly rulers that are completely subservient to the Zionists and the Americans. The people have said and continue to proclaim loudly that they are fed up with corruption, cowardice and the craven attitude of their rulers.

The rulers’ cowardice and treachery can be gleaned from the following episode. Even as Mubarak was teetering on the brink, he signed an executive order on February 8 prohibiting entry of Palestinians from Ghazzah even if they had valid visas. Similarly, hundreds of Palestinians were stranded at Cairo airport and other locations in Egypt unable to return to Ghazzah. The border was opened — but only one way into Ghazzah — on February 20 to allow the Palestinians to return home. The military regime has refused to lift the Zionist-imposed illegal siege of Ghazzah despite the Egyptian people wanting such restrictions ended. They must continue the struggle not only to demolish all pillars of the old regime completely but also break the siege of Ghazzah and reject the unjust peace imposed on them by the Americans and the Zionists if they are to achieve true dignity.

It must also be emphasized that simply getting rid of despotic rulers will not solve the problems afflicting the region, or indeed the Muslim world. There are systemic problems plaguing Muslim societies. The exploitative systems from the ground up must be uprooted, Iran-style, if people are to achieve true independence. Change will not come about at the hands of the militaries. They are instruments of oppression working to advance the US-Zionist agenda. The officer class in virtually every Muslim country — trained in the West and beholden to it, especially the Americans — is the bastion of nifaq in the local establisment. Unless the militaries are purged of the westoxicated officer class, no meaningful change can occur in the Muslim world.

Some rulers may have been driven from office, others may be running scared because their fragile state structures stand exposed but the struggle for dignity and honour is far from over. There is also the real danger that their struggles will be hijacked by vested interests — as has happened in Tunisia where the trade unions have joined the regime and betrayed the masses — and people may be left out in the cold. It will depend on the sagacity and wisdom of these leaderless movements to stay in the field until they achieve total victory. That will not come about as long as the old state structures are intact regardless of the soothing words uttered by the ruling elite and the military to respect the wishes of the people.

If the people fail to heed this elementary lesson, they would find themselves in the same sorry state that the people of Pakistan are in today after 60 years of broken promises. The struggle and the sacrifices would then all be in vain.

Turbulent times ahead for the Middle East

Palestinians have suffered more than 60 years of Zionist brutality; the latest anniversary of Zionist war crimes in Gaza was commemorated on December 27. This is but one of many problems afflicting the Middle East. There are others looming large in a region that has not seen peace for decades. The implantation of the Zionist entity in the heartland of Islam is the principal source of most of these conflicts and mass dislocations but there are also internal problems plaguing the region.

Two countries in particular, Egypt and Saudi Arabia that are important pillars of the US imperialist agenda are about to enter a period of turbulence whose consequences are difficult to predict. Both have aging rulers whose impending demise is likely to lead to ruthless succession battles. There are no set procedures for orderly transition. True, theoretically the Saudi constitution says the brother next in line will succeed the king (what ayah of the Qur’an or hadith permits this?) The problem is Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Sultan is totally incapacitated while King Abdullah, 87, is currently recuperating from multiple surgeries in the US. Even the third in line, Prince Nayef, is suffering from cancer as are a number of other princes. Some have back problems. Given their age and multiple diseases afflicting the army of children that Abdul Aziz ibn Saud sired — 37 from 22 wives — the kingdom is in for a rough ride. Abdul Aziz, it seems, raided caravans during the day and produced children at night. His nocturnal activities have created unforeseen problems.

Egypt is in even greater trouble. Hosni Mubarak, 82, is also suffering from cancer. He wants his son Gamal to succeed him but that is not so simple. The men around Mubarak have honed their murderous skills by terrorizing opposition groups like the Ikhwan al-Muslimoon and others that dared stand against Mubarak or his party henchmen in manipulated elections. These men, especially people like Omar Suleiman who currently heads the Intelligence Ministry, have no mercy. He has close ties to the Israeli spy agency, Mossad and is clearly their preferred man. Just prior to the Zionist attack on Gaza in December 2008, Suleiman had urged the Israelis to finish off Hamas.

Once the old Pharaoh is gone, these murderous men with oversized ambitions will not be deferential to Gamal Mubarak. They have little reason to, especially when their own ambitions are involved. Following Gamal Abdel Nasser’s death in September 1970, a period of political turmoil ensued until Anwar Sadat consolidated his grip on power. His assassination in October 1981 propelled Mubarak into the top spot but he too faced difficulties despite American and Israeli support.

His departure will create a huge political vacuum in Egypt. This is the result of prolonged dictatorial rule. Mubarak has been in power for 30 years, longer than the rule of his two predecessors combined. Sadat lasted 11 years and Nasser was at the helm for 18. Mubarak has ruled through a state of emergency that was first declared in October 1981 and has been renewed every six months. Thus, Egypt has not known any normalcy. With Mubarak’s death, more turmoil can be expected.

This would result in decline of US influence in the region. As Egypt’s ruthlessly ambitious men — generals and civilians — jostle for power, one of the most important outposts of US imperialism will be destabilised. What will emerge out of this desert storm is difficult to predict but such uncertainty can neither be good for the US nor Israel. The Islamic movement’s ability in Egypt to capitalize on this is an open question. What is certain is that two of America’s most obedient client regimes are heading for turmoil that would further weaken America’s already declining power. That cannot be bad for Muslims.gamal Abdul Naser