Books and Documents

Middle East Press (14 Dec 2016 NewAgeIslam.Com)

From Cairo to Istanbul, the Devil Is the Same: New Age Islam's Selection, 14 December 2016

New Age Islam Edit Bureau

14 December 2016

From Cairo to Istanbul, the Devil Is the Same

By Mshari Al Thaydi

Is Another Boko Haram In The Making?

By Thembisa Fakude

Palmyra and Aleppo, Bloody New Chapters in the Syrian War

By Maria Dubovikova

Theresa May Brings Back Thatcher Era to the Gulf

By Turki Aldakhil

Which Muslims Are Against Trump?

By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed

Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau


From Cairo to Istanbul, the Devil Is the Same

By Mshari Al Thaydi

13 December 2016

At around the same time, terrorism has once again revealed its hideous face in Egypt and Turkey. A monstrous strike targeted women, children and worshippers at the famous Saint Mark’s Coptic Orthodox Cathedral in Abbasiya, Cairo. At least 25 were killed and 31 others injured.

The terror that struck Istanbul was another evil act of terrorism. The Kurdistan Freedom Hawks (TAK) claimed the twin attacks – a car bomb followed by a suicide attack less than a minute later – that killed 38 people outside a sports stadium. This madness will unfortunately continue as there is a link between all that is happening and even if it does not appear to be the case.

The terror targeting Turkey is being nurtured through Syria and perhaps through Iraq as ISIS has categorized Turkey an enemy after it engaged in the war against it. There is also the war against the Kurdish militias in support of Russia and Iran and which aim to establish a Kurdish state that separates between Turkey, Syria and Iraq.

ISIS is the final form of armed fundamentalist outburst, which uses the concept of the “caliphate” and “jihad”, and is fighting the “enemies of Islam” as a means to recruit and mobilize especially after the West let down the Syrian people and the Russian and the Iranian regimes conspired against Syria and Iraq.

Egypt has a different kind of terrorism even though there is a link to ISIS in all these places and to Syria and Iraq and to al-Qaeda. Ahmad Salama Mabruk, aka Abu al-Faraj al-Masri, sat next to Abu Mohammed al-Julani when the new alliance of Fateh al-Sham was announced. In other words, the source of chaos, destruction and incitement to terrorism, as these groups put it, is what is happening in Syria.

Syria’s volcano, and now Iraq’s, is spewing out its lava on everyone. Torrents of fire are spilling into neighboring countries or rather across the entire world. The US, the world’s major superpower, probably thinks that its “isolation” from the Middle East is the solution and that it can settle down to just fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda.

Major Illusion

This is a major illusion because letting Iran and Russia commit crimes in Syria and Iraq clearly means more of ISIS and non-ISIS terrorism and more of international terrorism in the West and the US itself. It’s all crystal clear.

In his The National Interest article last week, Amitai Etzioni, Professor of International Relations at The George Washington University, wrote: “Such a Shiite-dominated Middle East is going to be – and, in effect, already is – a major breeding ground for transnational terrorism that is spreading into Europe and is threatening the US homeland.”

The roads to terrorism lead to one another and the solution is to block all of their supply chains. Is Donald Trump, the new leader of America, aware of that?

Saudi journalist Mshari Al Thaydi presents Al Arabiya News Channel’s “views on the news” daily show “Maraya.” He has previously held the position of a managing senior editor for Saudi Arabia & Gulf region at pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat. Al Thaydi has published several papers on political Islam and social history of Saudi Arabia. He appears as a guest on several radio and television programs to discuss the ideologies of extremist groups and terrorists.

Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2016/12/13/From-Cairo-to-Istanbul-the-devil-is-the-same.html


Is Another Boko Haram In The Making?

By Thembisa Fakude


Muslim Friday prayers can lead to traffic nightmares in many African cities. It is an inconvenience that has led most residents of these cities to come up with peaceful alternatives to circumvent this challenge.

However, in the city of Zaria, in the Nigerian Kaduna State, there was a growing animosity between the law enforcement agencies and the followers of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) in this regard.

Every Friday followers of the IMN, which is led by the charismatic 63-year-old Shia cleric Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, used to gather outside their headquarters, Hussainiyya Baqiyatullah in Zaria, for prayers.

The police had accused them on a number of occasions of disregarding the state laws by blocking traffic, which the IMN believed was used as a pretext to disrupt their activities.

This was an ongoing bone of contention, when on December 12, 2015 the situation escalated after soldiers accused members of IMN of plotting to kill the Army Chief, Tukur Buratai. The intervention of the army in the gathering of the IMN led to deadly skirmishes which resulted in the deaths of 347 people.

Subsequently Zakzaky and his wife were detained and have been in prison ever since. IMN have denied allegations of plotting to kill the army chief and have accused the army of using the plot accusations as a pretext to suppress their freedom and to kill and detain their members and leadership.

Following the massacre in Zaira the government instituted a Commission for Judicial Enquiry to investigate the incident.

In a rather shocking turn of events on December 5, the commission issued a White Paper or findings of its investigation. The White Paper basically absolved the soldiers of any wrongdoing and blamed the leader of the organisation, Zakzaky, for the massacre. It recommended that Zakzaky be prosecuted and the IMN declared an insurgent group - a dangerous move that can turn into a security nightmare for the Nigerian state.

Creating an Insurgency

There is a leadership bankruptcy on the side of the Nigerian government in dealing with the challenge of radicalisation. Indeed, the radical rhetoric from certain Muslim pulpits in Nigeria threatens national security.

However, heavy-handedness should be used as the last resort in tackling such situations because past experiences suggest that it can result in further radicalisation.

The current challenge involving IMN is reminiscent of how the government dealt with Boko Haram in its infancy in Maiduguri. There is enough evidence that tactics used by the government at the time backfired.

In 2009 the police stopped a group of Boko Haram members on motorbikes on their way to a funeral for not wearing helmets. The encounter resulted in police officers opening fire on the group, resulting in more than a dozen injured.

This eventually led to clashes between Boko Haram and the police, resulting in a number of deaths.

The subsequent arrest, torture and murder by the police of Mohammed Yusuf, the founder of Boko Haram, further complicated the situation. Yusuf's humiliation at the hands of the police was widely publicised.

Members of Boko Haram were angered by these actions and gradually adopted more violent tactics in defying state authorities in Nigeria.

Abubakar Shekau succeeded Mohammed Yusuf, and under his leadership Boko Haram became the one of the deadliest terrorist group in the world.

Nigeria Can't Afford another Insurgency

The continued detention of Zakzaky and his wife, the death of his three sons after a pro-Palestinian March in 2014 and the renewed suppression of IMN could culminate in a more dangerous situation.

It will all depend on how the federal government of Kaduna deals with the recommendations of the Commission of Judicial Enquiry.

The Nigerian government has a tendency to deal harshly with dissent, and there is little hope that it will relent on the recommendations this time around. The attitude of the government has always been that of digging in its heels in dealing with such matters.

The situation in Zaria seems set to get worse and the government doesn't seem as if it can afford to deal with another front of insurgency at this time.

The current discord between the authorities and the IMN is an extension of the global Shia/Sunni contestation. It is a phenomenon whose growth could be attributed to the steady flow of money from both Sunni and Shia sponsors into the African continent.

It has led to an entrenchment of schism and resentment between these sects whose members had coexisted peacefully over the years.

Nigerians must be cognizant of this entrapment and must resist all circumstances which could worsen the situation, including weak leadership. Relegating the decision on the future of the IMN solely to the ambit of the federal government of Kaduna could prove to be a fatal mistake in the long run.

Thembisa Fakude is a researcher at the Al Jazeera Center for Studies.

Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/12/boko-haram-making-161212123657493.html


Palmyra and Aleppo, Bloody New Chapters in the Syrian War

By Maria Dubovikova

13 December 2016

Freed from ISIS in a PR assault in March 2016 by Russia and Bashar al-Assad’s forces, Palmyra has fallen back into the hands of ISIS. In what felt like one day, ISIS orchestrated a significant redeployment of forces from Deir Azzor and Raqqa, crossing about 300km of Syria unnoticed, not stopped by anyone during their quick march. Four thousand ISIS fighters recaptured Palmyra in violent clashes within a few hours. According to the reports, all civilians were evacuated as well as archeologists working on Palmyra’s heritage restoration. The Syria Army had to retreat, leaving arsenals and military material that now has fallen into the hands of ISIS. Brutal fighting continues as the army, with the help of Russia’s air force, continue attempts to retake the city.

By irony of fate, having lost Palmyra to ISIS as well as ground in Homs, the Syrian army has liberated Aleppo (while others say Aleppo has fallen). The forces and Syrians loyal to Bashar al-Assad praise the victory and the beginning of the end of war, apparently not taking into consideration that their true enemy occupies over a third of their country and is not going to surrender.

The current situation raises questions about the future development of the conflict, but also gives many answers, confirms apprehensions and reveals a lot of particular traits of the situation that were not so visible before.

One thing that the situation in Palmyra has illustrated is the major problem of Syrian media coverage. There is no independent journalism in Syria. All that is at disposal of the people is state media which spreads more propaganda than truth, some independent sources, with hardly reliable sources as they cannot be checked, ISIS propaganda channels and social media accounts of the rebels, fighters or people who are reportedly tweeting being on the ground but too often appear to be somewhere else. In all cases, you cannot trust the information you receive - at best it can be biased, at worst it can be fake. The Syrian conflict has killed not only 500,000 people, but also independent journalism, as long as the journalists are violently targeted by al-Qaeda affiliated fighters, extremists and ISIS. And in these five years of war, those who stayed and survived have lost their unbiased approach.

Another issue is that just reporting anything that can be perceived as pro-Assad or anti-Assad leads to them immediately being labeled pro or anti-Assad. In such conditions, the media has been boiling over with extremely controversial information about Palmyra with the Russian media has been continuously repeating that “Palmyra is ours” when even the Syrians themselves have admitted that it is not.

However, this panicked media paralysis is understandable and this reveals the extreme sensitivity Moscow feels regarding what is happening in Syria.

Russian Goals

To understand what the loss of Palmyra means for Russia we should look at its interests in Syria in general. Russia pursues many goals in Syria - image building, declaring its full return to the world stage as a great power and other geopolitical interests based on claiming back its lost position in the Middle East. For Russia, Syria is a matter of defending principles and the basis of multi-polar world, which is important to limit the spreading influence of the US and its monopoly on managing global affairs. For Russia, the liberation of Palmyra was both a declaration of the intention to fight extremists in Syria as well as a strong PR manoeuvre that was crowned by the worldwide broadcast of a breathtaking concert of internationally recognized maestro Valéry Gergiev in the amphitheatre of Palmyra that once served as a place of public executions by ISIS. Since then Russia’s main target was mostly Aleppo, on which the eyes of the global community were focused. And the loss of Palmyra is an extreme blow to its far-reaching ambitions. There is no doubt that after the “liberation” of Aleppo, Russia will concentrate the might of its air force on Palmyra. And forces loyal to Damascus will probably re-capture the city from ISIS. But do they have any strategy for continued fighting and the power to keep all that is “liberated” in their hands?

The Syrian army is in such a vulnerable condition that it can hardly conduct actions in several directions at the same time, and being concentrated in one battle zone, it can hardly retain the attack in the other one and guarantee safety in liberated zones. ISIS is not weakened despite all hopes and they counter the lack of weaponry with high military proficiency and experience.

The liberation of Aleppo does not make the situation any easier. The opportunity for equal and balanced negotiations has been lost. The idea that Assad must step down does not seem so sound, especially for those Syrians loyal to him, for whom he is a president-liberator. This idea does not seem reasonable for Assad, as long he has his own truth and the current bloody victory will also make him deaf to all Russia’s exhortations to step down and start a transition process. There is a high risk that the rebels will probably radicalize and join ISIS as many moderates have been exterminated in Aleppo and Syria.

Furthermore, after the loss of Aleppo the Western powers will have a strong temptation to fight ISIS less thoroughly and push it to concentrate its forces in Syria. Possibly they would have a temptation to finish what the rebels have failed to do – destroy the Syrian army and overthrow Assad. The West has a long experience of using evil against evil. It is just one of the possible scenarios for the future but it does not seem so improbable.

If the Syrians could redirect all their hatred and aim it exclusively at the core evil of all humanity, they would have succeeded in defeating it a long time ago. The defeat of ISIS lies in the unity of the Syrian people. Being influenced by global players, for whom they are just pawns in the global geopolitical game, they are losing their lives, future and possibly their Motherland. The dramatic story of the Syrian conflict does not end with the fall of Aleppo, despite the hopes of Syrians loyal to Damascus, but it just starts a new chapter, and God knows, it could be much bloodier.

Maria Dubovikova is a President of IMESClub and CEO of MEPFoundation. Alumni of MGIMO (Moscow State Institute of International Relations [University] of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia), now she is a PhD Candidate there. Her research fields are in Russian foreign policy in the Middle East, Euro-Arab dialogue, policy in France and the U.S. towards the Mediterranean, France-Russia bilateral relations, humanitarian cooperation and open diplomacy.

Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2016/12/13/Palmyra-and-Aleppo-bloody-new-chapters-in-the-Syrian-war.html


Theresa May Brings Back Thatcher Era to the Gulf

By Turki Aldakhil

13 December 2016

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, all eyes were on the international community and how it will react to the invasion. They depended on the American stance and there were long debates at the Arab League after seeking the help of friendly international powers.

History is witness to the stance taken by the then British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. She promised Saudi King Fahd to help liberate Kuwait and effectively contributed to convince the US to launch the war. This was the most significant positive intervention by Britain in the Gulf since decades.

During the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) summit, held in Bahrain recently, the British returned to a regional forum after a long time. Making some exceptional and historic statements, Prime Minister Theresa May confirmed that Britain and the Gulf region face the dangers of Iranian threats adding that the Gulf’s security is Britain’s security.

Some tried to dismiss these statements and equated it due to volatile statements made by British foreign secretary Boris Johnson. However, he quickly adopted May’s rhetoric during the press conference he recently held alongside Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir and said that relations between Saudi Arabia and Britain are not limited to commerce and security as the two countries had enjoyed a long strategic relationship extending over 100 years.

Johnson added that Iranian threats in the region worry Britain just like they worry Saudi Arabia. Johnson also said that Britain is worried about Saudi Arabia being targeting from Yemen with ballistic missiles.

Strength of Relations

Gulf-British relations are distinguished for their strength, depth and solidity. Britain has contributed toward building and establishing the civil form of Gulf countries. Until the early 1990’s, it helped them through the phase of making the transition until they stood on their feet and oil began to yield revenues.

The political path thus matured and guaranteed Gulf countries’ stability and prosperity for long years. Cooperation between Gulf states and Britain continued on all levels, and proof to that is the military cooperation which has been on ever since these states were established.

Britain may have somehow been influenced by the American weakness during Barack Obama’s term and his policy of retreat in the region. However, interests intersected in quite a strong manner during May’s term as prime minister as Britain needs an economic partner it trusts to compensate for the repercussions of the absence of the European Union after voting to exit from it. Gulf countries are the most suitable for this role.

Despite Thatcher’s and May’s different approaches and legacies, the statements on the Gulf resemble a comeback after a period of abandonment and cold relations. There have been interesting statements such as: “We are willing to cooperate to confront Iran in Syria, Yemen and the Gulf, Saudi Vision 2030 is useful to all of us and we have aspirations for strong commercial relations with the Gulf, we are achieving great progress in the war against ISIS”.

The following statements were also made: “We will pursue all forms of terrorism that threaten the region’s stability, the Gulf’s stability is the entire world’s stability and we will spend more than 3 billion British pounds in the Gulf and the world to confront challenges. Saudi Arabia helped Britain and provided it with intelligence information that saved thousands of people. Gulf security is our security. We are here to communicate with new allies and I would like to open a new chapter of strategic cooperation among our people.”

Iran’s Reaction

Iran’s reaction to these statements were fiery as it has hinted at the possibility of controlling Gulf waters, threatened to close straits and vowed harsh reactions against Britain and Gulf countries. Whosoever following the developments can see the mutual challenges confronting Britain and the Gulf.

Britain needs to increase commercial trade with the Gulf after it lost its influence in India. This explains Britain’s recent approach toward India. There is also the security aspect after the refugees’ influx as many violent people infiltrate these refugees like what happened in Germany.

The Gulf’s experience with terrorism is far more than the Europeans’ due to geographic and cultural considerations. Gulf countries understand terrorism, its trends and developments more and they are more capable of gathering information and examining and monitoring threats.

This revival of British interest in the region encourages building of stronger alliances to confront Sunni extremism as represented by ISIS and Shiite extremism as represented by Iran and its armed militias which are spread across Arab territories.

Theresa May said it: “For if we work together, it is also an unparalleled opportunity to show that we understand the scale of the change people need.”

Turki Aldakhil is the General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. He began his career as a print journalist, covering politics and culture for the Saudi newspapers Okaz, Al-Riyadh and Al-Watan. He then moved to pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat and pan-Arab news magazine Al-Majalla. Turki later became a radio correspondent for the French-owned pan-Arab Radio Monte Carlo and MBC FM. He proceeded to Elaph, an online news magazine and Alarabiya.net, the news channel’s online platform. Over a ten-year period, Dakhil’s weekly Al Arabiya talk show “Edaat” (Spotlights) provided an opportunity for proponents of Arab and Islamic social reform to make their case to a mass audience. Turki also owns Al Mesbar Studies and Research Centre and Madarek Publishing House in Dubai. He has received several awards and honors, including the America Abroad Media annual award for his role in supporting civil society, human rights and advancing women’s roles in Gulf societies.

Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2016/12/13/Theresa-May-brings-back-Thatcher-era-to-the-Gulf.html


Which Muslims Are Against Trump?

By Abdulrahman al-Rashed

13 December 2016

Extremist powers in our region have declared war against President-elect Donald Trump under the excuse that he has a project to fight Islam and Muslims. They are trying to incite around one billion Muslims against the new US administration and against the US. Those performing this task are doing so through religious and media platforms affiliated with extremist Islamic parties, including the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime.

Is Trump really hostile to Muslims in general? Do his secretaries of state really have hostile stances against Islam as a religion?

Ever since Trump announced the appointments of major secretaries of state, many in our region spoke out against them, claiming Washington was willing to launch war on one billion Muslims. General James Mattis, who Trump chose as secretary of defense, has in fact clearly and frankly voiced hostility - but against terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda. He also has frank stances against what Iran is doing in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

General Michael Flynn, Trump’s new national security advisor, has also made outspoken speeches against extremist Islamic groups. Many have used these speeches to indicate that he is hostile against Islam and Muslims. Truth be told, what General Flynn said is what we ourselves say, that there is a dangerous virus inside Islamic society called extremism that has killed Muslims and threatened them everywhere and harmed them more than it even harmed the West and followers of other religions.

The ‘Dangerous Disease’

Doesn’t this dangerous disease exist in Muslims’ societies across the world? It certainly exists. Look at what happened in Turkey and Egypt during the past few days and what had happened in Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Jordan. Hideous crimes were committed by extremist groups - the same ones which Flynn and Mattis call for confronting. Mike Pompeo, who Trump chose to manage the most important foreign security institution, the CIA, has the same opinions about the necessity of confronting extremism and he’s aware of Iran’s sabotaging role in the region and the world.

If we realize that those who are angered by these three appointments are Iran, Al-Qaeda and Islamic groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood, we can understand that the problem is not in Trump’s choices, but in these men’s project to confront terrorism which the former parties sponsor or at least benefit from. The majority of Islamic countries agree with these state secretaries’ proposals and vision of the crisis that threatens the entire world. We, as Muslims, have for a decade and half now been engaged in a war against extremism and extremists, as an ideology and groups, and want the world to differentiate between Muslims and not put them all in one category and to stand with the majority of peaceful Muslims against this evil minority. It’s in our interest to deter regimes like Iran that supports terrorist groups, be it Sunni or Shiite, and allies with them and engages in regional wars under dishonest slogans such as defending Islam or standing against the West.

We understand that Hillary Clinton’s defeat in the elections angered the Muslim Brotherhood. What fueled the latter’s anger was how Trump received Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi in New York earlier this year. It’s on this basis that they try to picture Trump’s administration as racist and as an enemy of Islam and Muslims. They want to establish a popular bloc that exerts pressure to confront the new American government in order to intimidate it and force it to alter its stances and they are doing so by entrenching themselves behind Islam and Muslims.

Iran’s Leadership Of Extremists

However, the Muslim Brotherhood must realize that we don’t agree with them and don’t care about their aspirations for power and don’t want to stand with them. At the same time, we support any government in the world that’s willing to ally with us against extremism and terrorism as this has always been our desire, even before Trump entered the political arena. These groups must realize the threat of media, political and religious incitation against Trump and the West and how it will cause new waves of violence under false justifications.

For 40 years now, Iran has led extremist groups, whether armed or politicized or Sunni or Shiite, in Lebanon, Palestine and the Gulf and it continues to do so. It’s currently guilty when it comes to Iraq and the sectarian chaos across it and it’s responsible for the rivers of blood in Syria. It’s for the first time that we see Washington officials who realize the facts on the ground and frankly declare that they will not accept blackmail or keep silent over extremist and terrorist regimes’ and groups’ practices.

We must understand the motives behind the groups that launch incitement campaigns against the new American administration. Iran knows that two of the appointed generals know it through expertise and personal experience. ISIS knows that the phase of truce will end with President Barack Obama’s exit. The Muslim Brotherhood, which enjoyed Obama’s support and bet on Clinton’s election as president, is now before a new phase that may not be in its interest.

These are the reasons behind the anger and quick judgments against the new American administration, and they reflect the stance of all three groups, i.e. Iran, ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood, and those who sympathize with them. Meanwhile, the majority of Islamic countries will be very happy if he who arrives to the White House desires to fight extremism and terrorism.

Abdulrahman al-Rashed is the former General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. A veteran and internationally acclaimed journalist, he is a former editor-in-chief of the London-based leading Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, where he still regularly writes a political column. He has also served as the editor of Asharq al-Awsat’s sister publication, al-Majalla. Throughout his career, Rashed has interviewed several world leaders, with his articles garnering worldwide recognition, and he has successfully led Al Arabiya to the highly regarded, thriving and influential position it is in today.

Source; english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/world/2016/12/13/Which-Muslims-are-against-Trump-.html

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/middle-east-press/new-age-islam-edit-bureau/from-cairo-to-istanbul,-the-devil-is-the-same--new-age-islam-s-selection,-14-december-2016/d/109370


Compose Your Comments here:
Email (Not to be published)
Fill the text
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.