Tag Archive | "Islamic Republic of Iran"

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Goals of Islamic Education

Posted on 13 February 2012 by Tea Server



Prosperous is he who purifies it, and failed has he who seduces it. (91:7-10)

The mission of the Holy Prophet (S) marks the beginning of a historical movement for fashioning godly human beings and for founding great human societies on the basis of the sublime criteria of Islam. Though it marks the beginning of this historical movement, it was also a point of climactic end in the history of prophetic missions.

During those days human history had reached a point that it could learn its ultimate lesson from its final teacher, a lesson always as much productive and dynamic, and every day turning a fresh leaf to humanity. This is itself a miraculous quality of Islam and the Quran that in spite of being the ultimate religion it is also ever alive and fresh, capable of not only moving in step with the movement and growth of human societies and the development of culture and civilization, but also infused with the capacity to induce dynamism and movement. It is so resourceful that it can always cater to the needs of changing times and newly arising problems.

The verses of the Quran have been revealed in such a fashion as if there are layers upon layers of meaning: every layer when removed reveals new depths and. profundities of content. This is a miracle of the Quran. The Quran and Islam can best be compared to Nature itself; like nature, the more it is studied, newer dimensions are revealed, and fresher secrets are discovered with new research. Neither this inquiry and investigation come to an end, nor the discoveries and findings are ever exhausted. No matter how much progress and advancement man may make in the field of science he is still confronted with new enigmas posed by nature, which he has to understand and solve.

Knowledge has no limits. The profound book of nature is so rich in content and meaning that if the history of human thought continues for ever, this book is not likely to be read to its end. 

The Quran, too, is like the rich and profound book of nature, with the difference that the Quran is articulate and eloquent while nature is silent. But its content and resources are equally inexhaustible, and will ever remain as fresh and novel. Every day it conveys a new message to the humanity. 


The celebration of the days is for the purpose of the renewal of this covenant and is for the sake of giving life to these messages. If this reminiscence is not renewed and revived often, it is likely to face the danger of receding into oblivion. 

The yearly commemoration of this day is meant for the purpose of keeping alive those messages, and to remind the people about their covenant, that they may recollect that Islam had stirred various intellectual legal, educational, and cultural movements in human history, and is ever dynamic and alive and that, we, too, are called upon to actively participate in this movement and play our own role in this mission.

I want to discuss the problems associated with the subject of education in this gathering of brothers and sisters, who are all teachers.

We shall have to discuss this problem in the context of the system of the Islamic Republic, not in a traditional context. In our department of education, which was formerly a department with an official and traditional outlook, ordinarily we were used to functioning in an official capacity. The employment in this department was counted as one among different kinds of employment. Someone held a position in the municipality or the ministry of finance, someone else held a post in the ministry of education. One took up the job of a teacher because it was a job among other jobs and one had to work for a salary.

That was all there was to being a teacher. If there was any aim of education, it did not go beyond having to keep millions of our youth confined within four walls, to read aloud to them the contents of the books and to provide them with a diploma at the conclusion of their academic terms, a document that served as a permit to enter some new lucrative trade. In this way, from the first day all that the parents cared about was what his or her child would become after twelve or sixteen or eighteen years of school and college education, what office he would hold and what sort of income he would secure for himself.

Knowledge was not relevant. The diploma and the certificate served as a bridge to cross over to higher salary. Therefore, all that mattered was the diploma. There were, of course, certain hidden objectives also behind this organization of the educational system. The pagan system of the past wanted it that way that education should be no more than a kind of distraction for the people, ultimately ensuring cultural poverty, bankruptcy, dependence, absurdity and sterility. That system of education was designed to breed generations of indifferent, irresponsible and hollow individuals who cannot rely upon themselves.

Sterility was inbuilt in all sections of life through the system of education, which produced persons without any ideals, indifferent and neutral regarding their aims and goals. The result was that they were totally devoid of the goals of self-sufficiency, specialization, and expertise and consequently dependent upon others regarding their industry and agriculture. The weak level of indigenous specialization and expertise necessitated supervision and domination of the country by foreign political, military, technical, and even educational advisers and administrators. During the course of victory of our Revolution, we have watched how approximately sixty thousand foreign advisers, who were only a part of those engaged in administration and management of our affairs, fled this country.

There was hardly any construction company, corporation, ministry, factory, research centre or any other establishment in this country that was not run by foreign experts and advisers. In almost every industrial contract that was made, there were scores of various aspects of dependence on foreigners. In one atomic energy project alone, and other such projects, there were approximately two hundred military contracts that made us dependent upon two hundred different international power centres. We were happy in our heart of hearts that we had brought such and such a thing to our country, while in reality, with the establishment of such a project we had made our economy dependent upon the two hundred centres of exploitation and domination servile to the desires of bloodthirsty colonialists, who were responsible for exporting consumerist thinking and culture to our country. If they established some colleges in certain specialized fields which, for example, produced good doctors, we were so weak with regard to our goals and ideals vis-a-vis our own people that our doctors were absorbed by American and European hospitals to treat others, as if they deserved their services more than ourselves! If we established one or two specialized faculties in our country and succeeded in producing some experts, they were of benefit only for others. It was a strange thing that some of the prescribed courses of specialization in the medical colleges were about diseases that occurred in America and were not found in our country!

It meant that our student had to pass four, six or ten credits and spend thousands of túmans and a great deal of his time only for diagnosing a disease that exists in such and such a part or in such and such a state of the U.S.

What was the reason, and on what grounds much simpler diseases that occurred in our own country were not prescribed in the medical course? It is because our entire system of education was geared to the foreign interests. When 1 say that education also suffered from dependence, it should not be misunderstood. Dependence does not mean translation of foreign texts of physics and chemistry, for instance, into our language. Learning from others is in no way opposed to the ideals of self-reliance. The Muslims were responsible for developing the sciences of physics and chemistry. It were Muslims who first taught these sciences to others and later on other people made expansions in these fields. We should learn from others, complying with the words of the Prophet (S):

Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.

And:

Seek knowledge even [if it is to be found in a place as distant as] China.

The question of acquisition of knowledge from others is not a matter of dependence. Man should acquire good ideas, thoughts, knowledge, and skills, from all corners of the world. That is a different thing. The real problem with an educational system not geared to the objective of self-sufficiency is that the people are trained in such a way that instead of fulfilling the needs of their nation and establishing a sympathetic relationship with the deprived masses, instead of the service of the people and the care and treatment of the sick of our motherland, instead of making roads for our deprived villages, all efforts are directed in such a way that every effort undertaken is either for the sake of one’s pocket, or in the interests of the pagan oppressors, or for launching such projects as multiply our dependence on foreign powers. The real problem is the culture of dependence, adoption of hollow and empty cultural and intellectual ideals, values, aims and principles, which are devoid of meaning and are bankrupt.

There are 300,000 high school graduates in our country, whose only hope in life is that the universities may open, and that they may get an admission. It is perhaps because they count upon their chances of getting good employment after college education and elevation of their place and position in society. If they are told that the high school diploma bears the same value in the employment market, I think the majority of them would not care for the university education. If you visit any Eastern or Western country, you will find that only eleven to fourteen per cent of high school graduates find way into the university.

The majority, unable to find their way into the university, are absorbed in other jobs and fulfil other needs of the society.

What is the reason that our students while deciding upon the choice of their field of study are always after the subjects which offer better chances of entrance into the university or which are more paying. They do not give their mind as to which of the subjects is more congruous to their taste, their capabilities, or is appropriate to the needs of their society. It does not matter to them as to which of the subjects can be more useful for improving the lot of the deprived and the downtrodden, or which is more effective in assisting their societies in achieving self-sufficiency. The only thing that they consider is the market value of any field, or subject with better chances of admission to the university, regardless of whether the subjects opted by them for study are in conformity with their interests or not, whether they are in accordance with the demands of their society. that is absolutely of no concern to them. All this exhibits deterioration of our values, degeneration of ideals, and absence of any sense of responsibility.

Now, I ask my friends if they have sometimes asked themselves as to what purpose the schools serve? For the primary education perhaps it may be said that it serves the purpose of teaching the children to read, write and to do arithmetical sums, so that they may learn to sign their names and do not remain illiterate. But what is the purpose of secondary education then? Why do our children have to go through the high school?

You must have an answer for this ‘why’. If a few hundred questionnaires be distributed among you asking the very purpose of the higher secondary education, asking you why we send our children to schools, why we want to give our children secondary education, and so on, what shall your answer be? These questions are of great importance for us. I can imagine what the possible answers to these questions may be.

Perhaps most of you will say that the purpose is to learn and to make a headway in life, to be able to find a good job with a good pay, or something of this kind.

I think that in the system of the Islamic Republic, no act should be without having an aim to it. There should be a purpose in every act.

Moreover, the aims and purposes should be definite. I have already mentioned elsewhere that we have to see whether it is necessary for the children to study all the lessons prescribed in their texts. Are those lessons useful for the child and the future of his society? If they are not useful, we are obliged to announce that such and such a chapter in such and such a book is useless and unnecessary, or such and such a topic or even a subject is struck off from the syllabus. But if any of them are useful, they should not only be retained, but also studied, and learnt well. Sometimes I contemplate about this problem as to why eighty or ninety per cent of the children put aside their books and completely abandon them as soon as their examinations are over. What does this attitude imply? Does it not show that the book was not read or studied for the sake of its subjects, and there did not exist any bond between the student and the book? In other words, the book was studied merely for the sake of marks on the progress report. Once the report reflected the numbers, the whole affair comes to an end. The book becomes irrelevant for the student. This is a kind of loss for the Islamic Republic. We have to see first whether these lessons are essential for the society or not. If they are essential, what is the explanation for this behaviour.

If we really want to march forward in the direction of achieving self-sufficiency, if we do not wish to import any experts and specialists from foreign countries, if we do not wish to rely upon foreign experts and specialists for every small matter, we should firstly make our universities and schools independent of alien elements. We do not lack talent, as our youngsters are full of capacities. By God, Europe and America are not specially favoured regarding their intellectual and natural talents. That intelligence, intellect and potentiality exist in ample amount in this land also. Then why should we need to bring from other lands any experts or managers for setting up and managing our factories or advisers for training our armed forces? Why should we need to import spare parts from foreign countries? Why should we depend upon others for all kinds of ordinary industrial products?

These children of ours have proved during these two post revolution years that they have initiative, creativity, capacity for working hard and productivity. While I was visiting the war fronts, I noticed this reality. I saw that they had not only made certain important parts of tanks and guns, but also they could manufacture certain parts of Phantom planes. I saw them repair one of the biggest warships, the same ship that if they had wanted to repair three years back, it would have had to be in British waters waiting eleven months for its turn, and which would have cost us an expense of several million dollars also. It was repaired by our own workers. Our children have immense capabilities, why shouldn’t they be utilized? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to blossom? Why in lieu of this we should be so much dependent on others?

Who is it that can do this work, and lead the country towards self sufficiency? Who?

Shouldn’t the Department of Education and Training with its budget of more than forty billion túmans be able to shoulder this responsibility? Shouldn’t our universities accomplish this job with their expenses of eight billion túmans per year and bring about self-sufficiency for our country?

Why should a student have to spend precious twelve years of his life and give nine months of every year, and twenty to twenty-five days of each month, working four to five hours a day, in order to obtain a certificate and run after jobs without possessing any skill, any experience or capability whatsoever? May I ask you, gentlemen, with whom does this responsibility of wastage of thousands of invaluable hours of the life of our dear ones lie?

Why on earth should this expenditure of approximately four thousand túmans that the Department of Education and Training spends on every student, go down the drain and be all wasted in vain?

Why should all these resources be wasted? Is it inevitable that this waste and this loss should occur? Should our Department of Education be nothing more than a factory for production of worthless diplomas?

Our student who takes his high school diploma in literature does not have the skills of writing, does not know the art of public speaking, cannot do any kind of artistic work, has no idea of research and cannot even write a simple political analysis.

The one with a technical diploma does not know even very simple technological skills and crafts. The one who has completed the commerce and management course, knows nothing about clerical work or keeping of accounts. All of them, what they were after was to get a piece of paper. With this piece of paper in their hands, they go from place to place saying, “Give me some job, wherever you can. Don’t consider what I have studied, management or literature. I just want some job, no matter what. Give me one, and give me money.”

But, what did you study for the satisfaction of the needs of society? What have you done? What for was that money spent? To what purpose was all that time spent? There is no answer.

Even now the system of education is static, lifeless, sluggish, despondent, and decadent. My dear colleagues, I just want to mention something which is related to the nature of our own work. By God, whenever I visit the war fronts-those bustling centres of intense devotion and joyous activity I see a youth working without caring whether it is morning or evening, night or noon, without thinking about his rank, grade, salary or promotion orders. He toils for this country for more than eighteen hours out of his twenty-four hours; whereas, we, dear colleagues, besides a full three-month vacation, enjoy a two-week holiday at the New Year, and many more holidays besides. When the schools reopen on the first of Mehr, it takes some time before the school warms up and the classes get into full swing. Yet despite it all there are many among us who ask if the present twenty -four hours a week cannot be reduced to twenty-two and later on perhaps to eighteen!

Should I be content to teach for a meagre eighteen hours? Let us see how many hours there are in a week. Seven multiplied by twenty-four makes one hundred and sixty-eight. It means that I work for just eighteen hours out of 168 hours of the week, and that, too, not without a lot of grumbling about the hardships of the job, the pressure of the classes and so on. And these eighteen hours a week are without taking into account the other holidays throughout the year on the days of celebration and mourning. Besides, there are various kinds of leave, the sick leave, the contingency leave, and so on. Then there are other factors besides. Someday I may come late to the school. It does not matter, however, because the children are busy anyway. Someday I feel tired and finish the class earlier, or merge two periods into one of seventy minutes, and count these seventy minutes as two hours! But this does not stop us from expecting travelling allowances, overtime, upgrading and promotion: This year’s new grades have not come. There are rumours that the remuneration for correcting exam answer sheets is going to be reduced. There is some talk about the payment for setting exam papers too. There are rumours of a summer programme for us this year! What a hassle it has become. Only if Bakhtiyar would have come back! Alas, we shouldn’t have struggled, and the previous regime would have remained!. There are, of course, very few who think in these terms.

Dear colleagues, I want to make it clear that we have to change our old ways radically in dealing with the system of the Islamic Republic. We should open a new account for it. Let me give an example from one of the so-called advanced countries of the world. Some years ago we were in Tokyo for a visit. There I enquired about their school vacations. They told me that they have just a forty-day summer vacation, and two other vacations of ten days each, which altogether make two months in the whole year.

Incidentally, that day when we went to visit the schools was their last working day after which their forty-day holidays were to commence. Despite the fact that it was their last working day, in whichever class we went we saw that the class was at work. The teacher was busy teaching lessons while pupils attentively listened to him and answered his questions. On the last working day, and even in the last moments the classes were functioning normally. But here, as soon as we smell vacations even from a distance, we give up everything to do with teaching or learning.

If one tries to compare this situation with the sacrificing spirit of the thousands of youth on the war fronts, he has reasons for disappointment and frustration. If we sometimes pay a visit to their entrenchments, we can draw a lesson from them. In the volley of bullets and rain of fire we see them busy in making roads, erecting bunkers, repairing vehicles, or repairing arms. All are busy with their work. One dares not then ask as to how much they are paid. They do not know what is an appointment order, grade or promotion; they do not get any emoluments; they do not know what these things mean. Are they from a world different from ours? Is their duty obligatory for them and not for us? He is fighting in the defence of his own country; but does this responsibility of defending one’s motherland, and the responsibility of its construction lie on the shoulders of a limited group of people?

Do we really want to help this revolution in achieving fruition and success? If we do, then for the sake of God let us give more attention to the pupils inside the classroom. Suppose you, mothers and fathers, while on returning home your child comes and asks for your help to understand and solve some problems. Would you tell him that your working hours are over now? Would you tell your child that these are not your office hours and you are not in duty bound to solve his problems? Of course, it is not like that. He is your own child, and you are always ready to help him with your whole heart and in the spirit of generosity and love. There will be no consideration of day and night, or holiday or working day for you then.

In the same way, it is necessary that in this system of the Islamic Republic we should consider these dear children as our own children, the children of the Islamic Republic and the children of the Revolution, and put aside all other considerations of time, timetable, working hours and other such superficialities, and rise above all such things and realize our duty and our mission. We should raise the standards of education and attend to the needs of these children. We should invigorate and animate the schools in order to attain the goal of self-sufficiency. We should try to raise the general standard of scientific knowledge, specialization, and expertise. We should realize our duties with earnestness and awaken to the sense of responsibility. I do not say that we should not think about grade and designation. Of course not, we do not mean that all these things should be annulled. But as some used to say about the pulpit (minbar) that if other things have drawn you to the pulpit, at least think of God when you step upon the pulpit; in the same way, I would like to remind you that if salary and grade or something else is required to draw you to the classroom, at least as soon as you step into the class enter for the sake of God, for the sake of your revolutionary duty, and teach the children with devotion and dedication. Therefore, I would like to suggest that the working hours be increased in order to assist the children properly. We should have more extra classes. We should not accept the idea of sitting idle for three long months. Instead we should organize camps, coaching classes, and classes for giving training in first aid, social work, art work and military training. For our own benefit we should organize refresher courses, ideology classes and other study programmes. We should chart out programmes for participation in the activities of the Reconstruction Jihad, Baseej (volunteer forces), the war fronts and social work. The thought that we are idle today, or that we shall be idle this week should be distressing to us. Basically, the thought of idleness should be disagreeable in the system of the Islamic Republic. We should keep ourselves busy in one or some other constructive activity.

A programme for the summer vacations has already been drafted.

Some of the schools that are sufficiently equipped with respect to the physical training equipment and have ample space shall be kept open to children. They may come for half a day or twice a week and participate in the programmed activities. How easily in a short period of time a group of high school girl students can be trained in first aid, nursing care of the sick, and in looking after the wounded of the war fronts. Boy students may be given a short term technical training so that they may become useful for their society. Their physical training curriculum may be adapted to the goals of military education. Islamic ideology classes for strengthening their thinking may also be organized.

Programmes for learning political analysis, research and collection of political material from newspapers, writing, and art techniques can also be arranged. For students who have failed in certain courses special classes for coaching and for others classes for teaching of languages like Arabic, English, etc. may also be conducted.

The thought that the children’s energy is wasted in playing monotonous games in their homes and in the lanes, removed from any education and training, is of course a painful one. Why shouldn’t we, teachers organize some programmes? Why shouldn’t we have such programmes for ourselves too? We may hold certain sessions of group discussions for discussing Islamic and ideological problems. Some people may immediately demand, “Sir, please send some qualified teachers from Tehran so that we may conduct ideology classes.”

But from where can we bring such a large number of teachers who are more qualified and extraordinary? What is wrong if ten or twenty persons sit together and hold a meeting among themselves? Any of Martyr Mutahhari’s or, Allamah Tabataba’i's or any other philosophical or Islamic book may be taken as the topic of study and discussion.

They may study that book, do some research on the subject and analyse the problems. Once the discussion is started, the work can advance forward and they may reach a certain conclusion.

It is not necessary that someone should be brought from some other place to teach at a higher level. However, in the Department of Education, we are taking steps to provide video cassettes and prepare a series of films about comparatively elementary subjects and present them in different cities. There should be at least ten or fifteen of them, so that some good programmes may be within every in every city, body’s reach.

But in any case, in my view, everything should effervesce from within. This is true of our nation which brought about this revolution.

All the people had a share in bringing about this revolution. Actually the revolution itself is a kind of effervescence from within the people.

The zeal and ardour for constructive work and guidance should also come from within. There are at least some people among you who may be more qualified than others. Well, let them come forward to lecture about the same subjects that they know better than others. It is important that we advance our work through discussions, debates, studies, and through proper distribution of work among ourselves. As you know, there are already extension training courses for teachers, but this year their coverage was not so wide as to cover all the members of the teaching community. However, a section of the teachers would be covered anyhow.

In this connection, I have a request for the brothers and sisters who are working in different revolutionary institutions, like the Reconstruction Jihad, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (I.R.G.C.), and other such organizations, who sincerely want to render some cultural service. It is important that these organizations should work in coordination with the Department of Education so far as cultural programmes are concerned. It is not right that the I.R.G.C. should have a camp of its own, the Jihad of its own, and the Education Department another camp of its own. Of course, there is nothing wrong in all of them organizing a separate camp, but to coordinate them with one another will make them more efficient and useful. Because it is possible that a good student, an able teacher and a good headmaster may be simultaneously invited to participate in two camps. In such a condition, the lack of coordination may harm the cultural programme of each of those organizations. By coordination and distribution of work among themselves, they may be able to raise the general standards, and hence their efficiency and effectiveness.

The second point is that the Department of Education and Training has to comprehend its role. It should really be interested in educating people, in fashioning them and in making them useful individuals.

The teachers’ attitude should change from one of having to carry an uninteresting burden and the students’ atmosphere should be one of real interest in acquiring knowledge and learning various subjects.

We must never forget that ours is an Islamic Republic, and our aim should be simultaneously to create both an independent as well as an Islamic culture in character. Independence and richness of content are indeed among the characteristics of the Islamic culture. Our system is an ideological system. Our Revolution is not simply a political, or plainly an economic revolution, that we may say that previously we had a government with different pawns in the key positions, the name of the former government was ‘monarchy’ and that of the present is ‘republic,’ or that, formerly there were two houses of the parliament and presently there is only one, or that, formerly the prime minister was appointed in such and such a manner, and now he is appointed in some other way, or that a political system of one type has been replaced by a political system of another type.

Our Revolution is an ideological revolution, a revolution of values, norms, social affiliations, social rights and duties, ideals, points of view, outlooks, tendencies, etc. That is, there has been a revolution in the cultural, intellectual, and social essence of this nation and its value system. It is not a change of the political system alone. The whole ways of thinking, the points of view, the ideals, the hopes and the aims have been transformed; the whole cultural pattern of the nation has changed.

Now, such being the case, can we reopen the schools with the same spirit of the past, with the same goals and the same ideals? Can the teachers take up the same lessons with the same outlook, with the same kind of approach and attitude as they had in the past?

We hope to create a new generation of human beings, a new generation with new values quite different from those of the previous generation. For example, ten years back, when someone had asked a twelve-year-old boy as to his aspirations, or as to how he wished his country to be, or what he would like to become in the future, his answers would have been quite different from the answers of a youngster of today. If today we go to a school and ask the same questions, the children will answer in a completely different tone, as today new meanings have significance for them, new concepts, new values have become relevant for them. They want to work for the benefit of the deprived and the oppressed. They want their country to march ahead in dignity and honour, that it may be a free and independent nation. They want this Revolution to be exported to the other regions of the world.

They wish that this enthusiasm, this ardour, this dynamism, and this search should pervade every corner of our society. They aspire to be truthful and sincere. They are averse to corruption and bribery. They hate the idea that this country should sign agreements to the benefit of colonial and oppressive powers. They dislike to be merely in the service of their pockets, but desire to serve humanity in general. They want to live in such a manner that their eyes may not be dazzled by the East or the West. They do not want to lose their identity when confronted with foreign cultures. They want to bargain their dignity and honour. They want to preserve their personal identity, and retain their sense of dignity. They want to be at the sending end not the receiving end of the message. They want to be exporters of thought and cultural values and not importers.

In this system of our Islamic Republic, we want to replace the old values with the new ones. During the past ten years, if a little girl was asked as to what good life meant to her, and what she desired her future to be like, most probably she would have said that good life meant for her plenty of cosmetics, variety of dresses, colourful curtains, more luxury and more fun and recreation in life and above all a higher income. But today, when the same question is put, it is definitely answered in a completely different way. Today she says that she wants to serve, to struggle and to endeavour, to be more humane, to preserve her identity and independence, to be more self-reliant, effective, sincere and truthful.

Self-sacrifice and generosity, love of freedom, the resolve for resistance and headstrong perseverance, the courage to welcome martyrdom-all these are the new values of the new generation. Ten years ago such values were completely dead or non-existent in this country, but today they have been revived again and are a matter of pride and honour for our people, contrary to the decadence of the past years, when dainty dresses, dandyism, knowing a few foreign phrases, familiarity with films and film stars were regarded as an accomplishment as a thing which conferred ‘personality’ on one. Such was the kind of things our youth were after. Today the same youth think in the terms of self-sacrifice, service, effort, struggle, movement, resistance, etc.

These are the new values which are to be established firmly in our country. But whose job is it to nurture them and bring to fruition, and where? Are the schools exempted from the responsibility of this work?

If the schools remain indifferent to this responsibility, where are these human beings to be moulded? And where are these values and virtues to grow and flourish? Where are these children of ours to learn about Islam, and to be enfused with the spirit of revolution and resistance?

Accordingly, our teachers are the apostles of today, encharged with a cultural and intellectual mission and responsibility. Therefore, permit us to strongly resist all deviate and corrupt intrigues in our schools, and not to let our children fall prey to the foreign plots, to be corrupted by the venom of poisonous ideas and values. We shall have to catch up with those unholy, treacherous hands which corrupt our children in the schools, and cast them away. And at the same time, it is essential that we warmly clasp those hands that are sincere in serving Islam and the Revolution and their motherland. I do not say that we must be loyal to some individual, or to a certain group; but I certainly emphasize the necessity of loyalty to Islam and to the blood of the martyrs; or at least, there should not be any intention to sabotage the achievements of the blood of the martyrs. We do not expect every teacher to be exceptionally self-sacrificing, self-effacing, totally committed and a hundred per cent man of faith. But we require that the teacher, should not at least be hostile to commitment, hostile to the Islamic Republic and Islam and opposed to the Islamic training and education. If he himself confesses that he has no commitment at all, that he is merely concerned with the teaching of physics or mathematics, we shall accept him with open arms if he is not a saboteur or a traitor. The schools are open to all of them. When did we intend to set aside any educated person who is not hostile to the morality, thinking, and ideology of our Islamic system and revolutionary movement of our children? Never. But first we have to stop intrigues and corrupt and treacherous practices and then strive to provide opportunities for the development of all our sincere colleagues in the Department of Education and Training.

Society is like a pyramid, and not everyone is at the apex of the pyramid, be it from the viewpoint of commitment, faith, self-sacrifice, power, qualifications or any other factor. However, there are persons who are more resistant, more self-sacrificing, men of greater faith, greater sincerity, more aware and more conscientious than others. The nearer we approach the apex, the narrower it is. As a rule the pyramid is wider at the base, and there have to be people in the lower parts of the pyramid also. However, what is more important is that we should be a part of this pyramid, a part of the main stream of the ummah which is led at its head by the Imam.

The schools are in the service of those who have comprehended this Revolution and have accepted it. God willing, we hope that in the future we shall be able to introduce more committed faithful, and sincere forces into the Department of Education and Training and shall be able to make greater use of the sincere and committed individuals in this department.

We hope to utilize the active forces for developing the Islamic and education potential of the Department of Education and Training, and to provide them with more opportunities, encouragement and support so that they may play a more effective and active role.

The forces which are not dynamic and which have shown little or no movement, as I have already mentioned, if they are not harmful and disturbing, they shall also be utilized. At the same time we have to be very careful regarding offensive and detrimental elements in our schools.

The doors of the school should always be kept open for the sake of Islam, for the sake of the Muslim Ummah and for the sake of the Islamic revolutionary path of the Iranian nation, so that the Islamic cultural and intellectual activities may be accelerated and enhanced.

These schools are the centres for modelling human beings. Human beings are not modelled in the electricity department or some other department. They are of course to be fashioned in the schools. Why shouldn’t we then educate and train others and ourselves? Why shouldn’t we speed up the movement of Islamic, ideological, intellectual, and educational training- Therefore, I request you, brothers and sisters, that we should serve Islam and our Revolution with hope, with enthusiasm and spiritual fervour without any anxiety and doubt about the future. In this way, we can contribute our share and fulfil our duty by making the schools, these revolutionary institutions, more fruitful. I hope, God willing, that our work, our behaviour, morality, and our mutual relations and dealings shall conform to the Islamic standards.

Our aim is that our teachers and schools should advance on the above-mentioned guidelines, raising the general standards of education and enhancing the levels of the Islamic commitment, and social and revolutionary activity.

I hope that those brothers and sisters, who have recently joined this profession, and those who are going to join it in the future, will continue their work in an atmosphere of cooperation, harmony, devotion, ardour, and sincerity. I hope that our confrontation with problems would not be disappointing or discouraging. I hope that our attitude is one of hope for the fruition of our Revolution, and of effort for increasing the productivity and fruitfulness of the Department of Education and Training. Wassalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

*This was originally delivered as a speech by Martyr Dr. Muhammad

Jawad Bahonar, then a minister of education, to a gathering organized by the Islamic Association of the School Teachers of Kerman, on the day of the bi’that of the Holy Prophet (S). At the time of his martyrdom, Martyr Bahonar was the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran. This speech has been published in booklet form under the Persian title “Hadafha-ye amúzish wa parwarish-e Islami”.

By
Martyr Muhammad Jawad Bahonar *


Translated from Persian
by


Mahliqa Qara’i
By the soul, and Him Who perfected it and inspired it to
[distinguish between] lewdness and God-fearing.

**********

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Arab Revolutions: Remembering The First Days

Posted on 11 February 2012 by Tea Server

It would be my first blog on the great transformation taking place in the Arab World, and it is a transformation long overdue. What’s happening is not a freak moment in history but it is rather a natural reaction to what has been a long suppression of Arabs by other fortunate Arab oligarchs and bands of opportunists. Leaders, they were not. I remember when Omar Suleiman, the supposed Vice President of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, announced the latter’s resignation; I screamed of joy, I was ecstatic. It can happen! It just happened! I said to myself; Arabs can remove a president if that president betrays their trust, if he deprives them from basic dignity and freedoms. It first happened in Tunisia, but it was fast and it surprised everyone, even intelligence agencies that were supposed to be intelligent in gathering intelligence were unprepared for what was brewing. We did not it see it unfold day-by–day in Tunisia, Zine-Albidine Ben Ali rushed and fled the country, leaving everyone in a state of shock. I remember listening to the prophets of CNN and MSNBC dismissing rumors of contagion of this small revolution. They were wrong; the symptoms for the political and economic ills of Tunisia were prevalent in all Arab countries, hence, the revolution spread from the Atlantic to the Gulf, shaking the throne of some kings and toppling the self-appointed king of kings Muammar Qaddafi.
Egypt, January 25th, 2010 I was home all day glued to my TV watching Aljazeera Arabic. Hoping for a repeat, I see the hallmarks, but I am not sure. I read books describing revolutions of past history but I’ve never lived during or witnessed one, will the Egyptians do what their neighbors did two weeks before them, I have to stay tuned, I am. Every time Hosni Mubarak appears on TV, I say, this is it, only to have my hopes dashed and despair overtake me. During the three weeks, starting January 25th a struggle was taking place between the forces of the despot and the forces of the common weal. Sunday through Thursday momentum subsides and remains so until Friday, bringing another meaning to TGI Fridays, when the Egyptians come out in force after Friday prayers to demand the removal of the regime.
Egyptians did remove the regime, so did the Libyans, but with a heavy price. Moroccan compromised for greater transparency and accountability to the Parliament and elected representatives of the people. Yemenis deposed of the head of the regime but not the regime. Gulf countries bought the people’s hearts and tolerance of the regimes with an expensive and expansive social safety net. The Libyans suffered huge number of fatalities in their quest for freedom. Freedom has a price. Unfortunately for Muammar Gaddafi, he miscalculated, had he shown mercy to his people and spared them the months of bombing and killing by mercenaries, they could’ve been reciprocal toward him after his capture. Alas, as the common wisdom taught us: you reap what you sow. Arrogance is blinding. Wittingly or unwittingly, Bashar El-Assad is following in Gadhafi’s footsteps, believing that mass murder will save his dynasty.
Bashar El-assad is betting on the strategic alliance his country has with the republic of Iran and the complex make-up of the sectarian allegiances in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. The Middle East have seen the disastrous consequences of a civil war in Iraq, and it is trying by all means to avoid a repeat of such a scenario that could engulf the region. Russia will try it’s hardest not to break with its last ally in the Middle East. If the regime in Syria falls, Russia will lose its last totalitarian friend in the region. The people of Syria, however, are betting on their determination and the tectonic movements around them. Just like no one has predicted the spontenous start of these revolutions, no one can foretell how will they end. One year on, The transformation is still progress.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Pakistan to support Iran in case of war

Posted on 10 February 2012 by Tea Server

Pakistan’s high commissioner warned the Britain warned that Pakistan would be left with no choice but to support Iran if Israel attacks Iran.

In an interview to British newspaper he also added that Britain must to help to stop American drone attacks causing killings of many innocents.

“We know the damage — destroyed schools, communities, hospitals. They are civilians — children, women,

Syndicated from: PAKISTAN DEFENCE BLOG

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Muhammad – The Most Influential Man in History

Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server



My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. Of humble origins, Muhammad founded and promulgated one of the world’s great religions, and became an immensely effective political leader. 

Today, thirteen centuries after his death, his influence is still powerful and pervasive. The majority of the persons in this book had the advantage of being born and raised in centers of civilization, highly cultured or politically pivotal nations. Muhammad, however, was born in the year 570, in the city of Mecca, in southern Arabia, at that time a backward area of the world, far from the centers of trade, art, and learning. 

Orphaned at age six, he was reared in modest surroundings. Islamic tradition tells us that he was illiterate. His economic position improved when, at age twenty-five, he married a wealthy widow. Nevertheless, as he approached forty, there was little outward indication that he was a remarkable person. 

Most Arabs at that time were pagans, who believed in many gods. There were, however, in Mecca, a small number of Jews and Christians; it was from them no doubt that Muhammad first learned of a single, omnipotent God who ruled the entire universe. When he was forty years old, Muhammad became convinced that this one true God (Allah) was speaking to him, and had chosen him to spread the true faith. 

For three years, Muhammad preached only to close friends and associates. Then, about 613, he began preaching in public. As he slowly gained converts, the Meccan authorities came to consider him a dangerous nuisance. In 622, fearing for his safety, Muhammad fled to Medina (a city some 200 miles north of Mecca), where he had been offered a position of considerable political power. 

This flight, called the Hegira, was the turning point of the Prophet’s life. In Mecca, he had had few followers. In Medina, he had many more, and he soon acquired an influence that made him a virtual dictator. During the next few years, while Muhammad’s following grew rapidly, a series of battles were fought between Medina and Mecca. This was ended in 630 with Muhammad’s triumphant return to Mecca as conqueror. The remaining two and one-half years of his life witnessed the rapid conversion of the Arab tribes to the new religion.


When Muhammad died, in 632, he was the effective ruler of all of southern Arabia. The Bedouin tribesmen of Arabia had a reputation as fierce warriors. But their number was small; and plagued by disunity and internecine warfare, they had been no match for the larger armies of the kingdoms in the settled agricultural areas to the north. However, unified by Muhammad for the first time in history, and inspired by their fervent belief in the one true God, these small Arab armies now embarked upon one of the most astonishing series of conquests in human history. To the northeast of Arabia lay the large Neo-Persian Empire of the Sassanids; to the northwest lay the Byzantine, or Eastern Roman Empire, centered in Constantinople. Numerically, the Arabs were no match for their opponents. On the field of battle, though, the inspired Arabs rapidly conquered all of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. By 642, Egypt had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire, while the Persian armies had been crushed at the key battles of Qadisiya in 637, and Nehavend in 642. But even these enormous conquests, which were made under the leadership of Muhammad’s close friends and immediate successors, Ali, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, did not mark the end of the Arab advance. By 711, the Arab armies had swept completely across North Africa to the Atlantic Ocean There they turned north and, crossing the Strait of Gibraltar, overwhelmed the Visigothic kingdom in Spain.

For a while, it must have seemed that the Moslems would overwhelm all of Christian Europe. However, in 732, at the famous Battle of Tours, a Moslem army, which had advanced into the center of France, was at last defeated by the Franks. Nevertheless, in a scant century of fighting, these Bedouin tribesmen, inspired by the word of the Prophet, had carved out an empire stretching from the borders of India to the Atlantic Ocean-the largest empire that the world had yet seen. And everywhere that the armies conquered, large-scale conversion to the new faith eventually followed. Now, not all of these conquests proved permanent. The Persians, though they have remained faithful to the religion of the Prophet, have since regained their independence from the Arabs. And in Spain, more than seven centuries of warfare, finally resulted in the Christians reconquering the entire peninsula. However, Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two cradles of ancient civilization, have remained Moslem, as has the entire coast of North Africa. The new religion, of course, continued to spread, in the intervening centuries, far beyond the borders of the original Moslem conquests. Currently it has tens of millions of adherents in Africa and Central Asia and even more in Pakistan and northern India, and in Indonesia. In Indonesia, the new faith has been a unifying factor. In the Indian subcontinent, however, the conflict between Moslems and Hindus is still a major obstacle to unity.

How, then, is one to assess the overall impact of Muhammad on human history? Like all religions, Islam exerts an enormous influence upon the lives of its followers. It is for this reason that the founders of the world’s great religions all figure prominently in this book. Since there are roughly twice as many Christians as Moslems in the world, it may initially seem strange that Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of certain of Muhammad’s insights that he believed had been directly revealed to him by Allah. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad’s lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran therefore, closely represents Muhammad’s ideas and teachings and to a considerable extent his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous. It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity.

On the purely religious level, then, it seems likely that Muhammad has been as influential in human history as Jesus. Furthermore, Muhammad (unlike Jesus) was a secular as well as a religious leader. In fact, as the driving force behind the Arab conquests, he may well rank as the most influential political leader of all time. Of many important historical events, one might say that they were inevitable and would have occurred even without the particular political leader who guided them. For example, the South American colonies would probably have won their independence from Spain even if Simon Bolivar had never lived. But this cannot be said of the Arab conquests. Nothing similar had occurred before Muhammad, and there is no reason to believe that the conquests would have been achieved without him. The only comparable conquests in human history are those of the Mongols in the thirteenth century, which were primarily due to the influence of Genghis Khan. These conquests, however, though more extensive than those of the Arabs, did not prove permanent, and today the only areas occupied by the Mongols are those that they held prior to the time of Genghis Khan. It is far different with the conquests of the Arabs. From Iraq to Morocco, there extends a whole chain of Moslem nations united not merely by their faith in Islam, but also by their Arabic language, history, and culture.

The centrality of the Koran in the Moslem religion and the fact that it is written in Arabic have probably prevented the Arab language from breaking up into mutually unintelligible dialects, which might otherwise have occurred in the intervening thirteen centuries. Differences and divisions between these Arab states exist, of course, and they are considerable, but the partial disunity should not blind us to the important elements of unity that have continued to exist. For instance, neither Iran nor Indonesia, both oil-producing states and both Islamic in religion joined in the oil embargo of the winter of 1973-74. It is no coincidence that all of the Arab states, and only the Arab states, participated in the embargo. We see, then, that the Arab conquests of the seventh century have continued to play an important role in human history, down to the present day. It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history

**********

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Iran Starts Mass-Production Of Anti Ship Zafar Cruise Missile

Posted on 09 February 2012 by Tea Server



Irani Anti Ship Zafar Cruise Missile

Irani Anti Ship Zafar Cruise Missile

Irani Anti Ship Zafar Cruise Missile

Irani Anti Ship Zafar Cruise Missile
 Iran on Saturday inaugurated the production line of a newly unveiled naval cruise missile, called Zafar (Triumph).

The production line was inaugurated by Iranian Defense Minister
Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi in a ceremony at the Defense Ministry'
Aerospace Industries Organization on the occasion of the Ten-Day Dawn
ceremonies, celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the Islamic
Revolution back in 1979.

The ceremony was also attended by Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Naval Force Brigadier General Ali Fadavi.

During the ceremony, the first cargo of Zafar missiles was delivered to the IRGC.

Speaking to reporters, Vahid said that "Zafar is a short-range,
anti-ship, radar guided missile capable of hitting and destroying small
and medium-sized targets with high precision".

He added that the missile can be mounted onto light and speed boats,
enjoys a high capability in anti-electronic warfare and is highly
destructive.

Iran has made giant progress in arms production, specially in area of missile technology, in the last decade.

Iran's latest cruise missile production, Qader (Mighty), was displayed
to the public during the military parades marking the Week of Sacred
Defense in September.

READ MORE

Syndicated from: ASIAN DEFENCE NEWS

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A New Direction for EU-Russian Relations?

Posted on 08 February 2012 by Tea Server

As Europe suffers a severe a cold snap, EU-Russian relations are experiencing a proverbial chill. The diplomatic cooling is the result of EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton’s criticism of Putin’s democratic credentials. The sharpness of Ashton’s critique was for many a somewhat surprising, yet desirable development. Indeed, the tough stance on the state of Russian democracy has provided Ashton with rare kudos from commentators and MEPs. Could these new tones be a sign of a more confrontational EU stance on Russia’s human rights record?

Among Ashton’s critique points was the government decision not to register Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the opposition party Yabloko, for the March election, the intention of Putin and Medvedev to swap jobs (again!), and more generally a support of the Russian people’s desire to “rein in corruption and impunity, and to give more breathing space to democratic process.” Of course, Ashton also urged Russia to not veto the UN Security Council resolution on Syria.

Russian officials were quick to shoot back, accusing the EU of meddling in internal affairs, calling Ashton’s criticism “bewildering” and saying that it “overstepped the bounds of political correctness.” In the official Russian view, the EU and US are using the democracy movement as a pretext to leverage influence in Russia through utilization of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and pro-democracy organizations.

Needless to say, Russia and China disregarded all pressure and vetoed the Security Council’s Syria resolution. Russia and China have since been catching some well-deserved flak from the international community, not that that will have an immediate effect on the ground in Syria. But, in this context, it has had an effect on global opinion of Putin’s Russia and how to deal with it.

Arguably the EU is now finding a new more confrontational diplomatic footing, with more emphasis on supporting democratic developments in Russia. Some might say that it’s about time. But it seems fair to say that Putin’s current hardships were unforeseen by most, including the EU. Where Europe previously was preparing to deal long-term with a Russia like the one Putin took over in 2000, the game has now changed and the EU’s stance has changed with it.

For example, the December 2011 EU-Russia Summit was dominated by preexisting issues, such as visa-free travel and Russia joining the World Trade Organization. Although human rights and democracy issues were discussed at the summit, Ashton’s statements on these matters were deemed “weak” by Mikhail Kasyanov, leader of the opposition party Parnas. Human rights are now center stage, and Ashton statements have grown stronger.

In previous years, EU members states have by-and-large followed a policy of pursuing economic goals, while limiting their criticism of human rights abuses. The European Council on Foreign Relation’s European Foreign Policy Scorecard points to EU diplomacy being a result of an overriding wish for cooperation with Russia on a swath of issues, ranging from trade to global security and cooperation in the Russian/European neighborhood. Putin’s actions at home and abroad have damaged the assumptions that the policy of cooperation policy built on, i.e. that economic modernization and engagement would gradually bring about a more democratic Russia.

Naturally, there are limitations to the EU’s ability to influence Russia. Disagreements over ending frozen conflicts in Georgia and Kosovo are examples. And of course, cold snap and all, Russian natural gas has previously provided Putin with a stick with which to beat the Europeans. But limitations will always exist. The EU now has an opportunity to test these limitations.

Ashton’s critique of Putin’s Russia is a good thing. These days, how else is one to react but with support of those who come out in favor of democracy movements? And in this respect, Putin is certainly not looking stellar. Putin and Assad are all too easy to lump together as autocratic brothers-in-arms, each trying to retain their grip on power with the methods that happen to be at their disposal.

While not forgetting that Russian cooperation is necessary to solve the issues of the day, e.g. Russia’s role in negotiations with Iran, we must hope that the EU will maintain its pressure on Putin’s Russia. In an age where democratic reform is a rallying cry, Putin quiet possibly has made a big mistake throwing in his lot with the likes of Assad. This offers an opportunity that should not be left untried.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sarkozy in Perspective

Posted on 08 February 2012 by Tea Server

S&P finally downgraded France’s credit rating several weeks ago along with some other EU Member States. Such decision by S&P could undeniably cost Sarkozy’s reelection in May 2012. Many see the downgrade of France’s credit rating as Sarkozy’s sole responsibility. But May 2012 is still very far away from a political standpoint. Since his election in 2007 Sarkozy has been a very polarizing political figure in France as proven by the large variety of nicknames given by the media such as President Bling-Bling, Sarko l’Américain, and so on. This blog will put into perspective Sarkozy’s first and maybe last mandate as French President by assessing his contribution to the construction/safeguard of the EU (in defense and security questions), advancing French foreign policy, and the buildup of the transatlantic relations.

Sarkozy, son of a Hungarian immigrant, rose to the highest political sphere quite quickly and unconventionally in French standard. He started his political life in the mid-1970s in the Municipal Council of Neuilly-sur-Seine, one of the richest suburbs of Paris, wherein a large segment of France’s political, economic, industrial and financial elites live. The fact that Mr. Sarkozy’s political life started surrounded by the French elite was considerable for his political career. The creation of an intellectual and support base traditionally takes place in the famous Grandes Ecoles, such as Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA), as it has been the case for previous French presidents and ministers, and certainly is the case of François Hollande, the Socialist Candidate. Sarkozy was able to compensate this lack with its Neuilly connections. The latest scandal connecting Sarkozy with the L’Oreal heiress, Liliane de Bettencourt, is one example of his powerful network. A paper produced by the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute counts some interesting facts on the rise of Sarkozy and his understanding of politics.

Following his election in May 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy appeared to have changed radically the direction of France’s foreign policy, especially towards the US. Sarkozy’s decision to re-establish ‘cordial’ relations with the US, still under the presidency of Bush, was in direct rupture with his predecessor, Jacques Chirac. The latter opposed his American counterpart, President Bush, in 2003 on the hot topic of the invasion of Iraq. The 2003 transatlantic and European split was real and substantial. The European unity was only reinstituted with the approval of the 2003 European Security Strategy, which symbolizes the agreement between EU Member States of a common agenda and united security vision. As per Donald Rumsfeld, US Secretary of Defense at the time, Europe was then divided between Old and New Europe; France being one of the old members considering its opposition to the Iraq war. The tensions between the US and France remained high until the election of Sarkozy. Some talked at the time of ‘Sarko l’Américain,’ as he expressed at many occasion during and after the presidential race his admiration for the American model. However, Justin Vaïsse of the Brookings, argued that in fact the Americanism of Sarkozy is much more embedded into Hollywood and Elvis Presley rather than the admiration for the American political system.

The transatlantic relations between France and the US can be divided into three periods. First, from 2007 to 2008, the last part of the Bush administration, which I often refer as the ‘good Bush period,’ was favorable for a rapprochement between the two sides of the pond. Second, after the election of Obama, the honeymoon was extremely short. Very early in his presidency, Obama reoriented the attention of the US foreign policy from Europe to Asia. Such strategic move by Obama has affected the relations with his European counterparts. And the third period was since the G8 summit in Pittsburgh, following the collapse of the financial system in 2008, with closer relations on dealing at the international level with the financial crisis and with Iran. However, in general, the rupture with Chirac was over-emphasized, as Sarkozy did not change that much the direction of the French foreign policy. Sarkozy’s decision to fully reintegrate France within the military structures of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was a moderate signal of his Atlanticism considering that France was always an active and core member of the alliance. The debate in France about such move was certainly excessive.

France was also a key actor during the summer 2008 crisis in Georgia. Following the invasion of Georgia by Russia, Sarkozy played an important role in monitoring Russia-West relations and in limiting a major split between the former Cold War enemies. Sarkozy did play a central role, but made some costly decisions and compromises for not only Georgia, but also the field of international law and human right. At that time France held the EU Presidency and was the voice of the EU, undermining Javier Solana’s role. Russian-French relations have historically been good since the late 19th century and remain quite stable. The latest part of this love story was the sale by France of a French Mistral class amphibious assault ship, creating criticism on both sides of the Atlantic.

One of the highest points of his presidency will remain the gamble on the Libyan campaign. Following a disastrous beginning of the year 2011 with total miscalculations and evaluations of the importance and reality of the Arab spring in Tunisia and then Egypt, Sarkozy decided to be proactive in the support of the rebels in Libya fighting Colonel Qaddafi. The miscalculation by the prestigious French diplomatic corps and intelligence services will remain as a stain and most likely become a cas d’école of diplomatic failure for future generations. Sarkozy did play a crucial role in getting the UN Security Council to agree on the UNSC Resolution 1973 allowing the implementation of a no-fly zone over Libya. Sarkozy was then able to bring the Americans on board and get NATO involved in the war in Libya. The use of NATO was critical for the success of the mission as French and British armies, navies and air forces have been considerably affected by budget cuts. For example, as of today Britain does not have an aircraft carrier, which seems quite contradictory to its historical strategic culture and heritage as a maritime power. The Libyan mission was a success and will become a template for future military interventions: short, precise, highly technologized, multilateral, and quite cheap. However, Sarkozy’s decision to use NATO was a major setback for the EU, which was completely bypassed by London and Paris, as well as discredited. The best example of the CSDP weakness is the fact that EUFOR Libya was created, but never deployed. Thus, HR Ashton remained quiet and irrelevant throughout the different steps of the Libyan campaign.

What next for 2012? Sarkozy does have a busy schedule until the first round of the presidential election. The year starts quite well for France and ultimately Sarkozy considering the fact that India decided to buy for $20bn of France fighter jet, Rafale, at the expense of the EADS’ Eurofighter Typhoon. Such contract is a true illustration of Sarkozy’s understanding and mastery of politics. The Financial Times published an outstanding article on the dogfight taking place backstage in order to sale the fighter jet. In addition to his reelection campaign, several topics need to be addressed, or at least discussed: first, Iran. What should France do about it? Is it the time to empower the EEAS led-by Lady Ashton and use the similar approach of 2003 EU3+1 implemented during Solana’s mandate? Or is it the time to discuss military operation within NATO? What is certain is that Sarkozy will not get a UNSC Resolution as China and Russia will definitely oppose it. Second, the mission in Afghanistan. France has been progressively removing its troops from Afghanistan, but has actively contributed to the European Gendarmerie Force (EFG) in charge of training the Afghan National Police and Afghan National Army. With the announcement by the US to remove the troops by 2014, the Europeans will soon be following this trend. Will the EGF remain or should it come back home as well? Third, Syria. The violations of international law by the Syrian government are undeniable and some members of the Arab League monitoring team have even expressed their anger and opposition to the Assad regime. Avoiding and sidelining Syria could haunt Sarkozy in the future, the same way the Rwanda genocide has been haunting French political elites for over 15 years, but for different reasons. Sarkozy understands that the UNSC will not agree on a Resolution, but decision needs to be taken on the matter. Unfortunately until today China and Russia have favored sovereignty over humanity. Could it be done outside the laws with a NATO-led operation as it was done in 1999 in Kosovo? It would be ethically a right mission embodying the R2P concept, but wrong as it would violate international law. Fourth, Turkey. Franco-Turk relations have been at their lowest since the adoption by the French Assembly of the recent law criminalizing the denial of the Armenian genocide. Poor bilateral relations with Turkey will ultimately hurt and affect the overall EU and NATO relations. Turkey could block, as it has done in the past, Berlin Plus type NATO operations. Sarkozy must address the matter with Turkey and find new common ground. Fifth, the economic crisis has been painful for the Euro-Atlantic community. The Eurozone is still not safe and saved, as the financial and economic situations of Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal remain volatile. Sarkozy with his German counterpart, Ms Merkel, have a lot of work in readjusting and agreeing on the rules of the game and reforming the Eurozone. Sixth, the British headache. Since the gamble of Prime Minister Cameron back in November, the relations between Britain and France have not been of the most pleasant. The Franco-Anglo relations are central for the construction of the common EU defense polict as it was the case in the 1998 Saint-Malo Treaty creating the ESDP, and in the 2010 Defense Treaty. Both actors need one another in order to maintain their active foreign policies and keep the construction of the CSDP going. 2012 will be interesting to see how France and Britain readjust their relations either with the reelection of Sarkozy; or with the election of Mr. Hollande.

Even though, I have not been a supporter of Mr. Sarkozy’s domestic and social policies as well as fundamentally disagree with his leadership and governing style, I have to admit that he has been an interesting international leader. His approach to foreign policy is quite in the continuity of French Gaullist heritage. However, the case of the French operation in Ivory Coast, last April, has been completely under-studied and under-covered by global media. Some have argued that the Libyan mission was a simple cover-up for the real mission and French interests, Ivory Coast. I would also criticize his lack of commitment to the construction and strengthening of the EEAS. It is true that Ms. Ashton has not been the best representative as well as has been unable to establish a common EU vision, however she was appointed by the 27 Heads of State and Government. Sarkozy was part of the appointing committee, and privileged at that time the securing of the DG Internal Market to Michel Barnier rather than getting a French HR. Sarkozy’s priorities were set: French’s influence over the common market, even though the Directors are theoretically not supposed to represent their national government; l’Europe de la defense after.

Until then there is one thing that I can’t wait to see: who will be representing France at the NATO summit in May in Chicago?

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

US Congressional Hearing May Spell Trouble for Pakistan

Posted on 07 February 2012 by Tea Server

The United States (US) Committee on Foreign Affairs is set to convene a congressional hearing on Wednesday (February 8), for an exclusive discussion on Balochistan.

The extraordinary event has generated great interest among followers of Pakistan-US relations, as the allies’ mutual relationship seems to be deteriorating. The powerful House of Representatives committee oversees America’s foreign assistance programs and experts believe it can recommend halting US assistance to Pakistan over human rights violation in Balochistan.

Calls for ‘independence’
While Islamabad has strictly treated Balochistan as an internal matter, the debate on such a divisive topic by the powerful committee has highlighted the level of American interest in Balochistan and its support, if any, for the nationalist movement. On its part, Pakistan has kept Washington at arm’s length on the Balochistan issue, by refusing to grant it permission to open a consulate in Quetta.

A Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, who recently co-authored an article with Congressman Louie Gohmert expressing support for an independent Balochistan, will chair the hearing.

“Perhaps we should even consider support for a Balochistan carved out of Pakistan to diminish radical power there (in Pakistan),” Rohrabacher wrote in his piece.

According to Asia-Pacific Reporting Blog, “it is expected that the hearing will tackle issues related to whether or not the US Congress should tie human rights issues in Balochistan to Pakistani aid.”

Witness box
Another area of interest is of the controversial witnesses who will testify before the committee. The three-member panel comprises of defence analyst Ralph Peters, Georgetown assistant professor, C. Christine Fair and Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan Director of the Human Rights Watch.

Ironically, the panel on Balochistan does not include a Baloch representative, an issue which has disappointed the Baloch diaspora in the United States, who fear the misinterpretation of their stance by people they view as unfamiliar with the Baloch conflict.

One of the witnesses, Ralph Peters, attracted scathing criticism by right-wing Pakistani strategists in June 2006, when his article Blood Borders was published in the Armed Forces Journal with a map of Free Balochistan. Peters, 59, a former US army officer, is expected to support in his testimony the idea of an independent Balochistan comprising of the Balochistan provinces in Pakistan and Iran and parts of Afghanistan.

On the other hand, Dr Christine Fair is known as a passionate supporter of Pakistan with an anti-India stance. The Pakistani media quoted Dr Fair in March 2009, for allegedly linking India with the Baloch insurgency. She was reportedly questioned the role of the Indian consulates in Afghanistan and Iran.

“Having visited the Indian mission in Zahedan,” she told a roundtable organized by the Foreign Affairs magazine, “I can assure you they (Indians) are not issuing visas as their main activity.” Later on, however, she told Outlook, an Indian news magazine, in an interview that the Pakistanis had blown her comments out of proportion.

On Twitter, a week ahead of the hearing, Dr Fair called Ralph Peters, the fellow witness, a “nut” and asked “WHAT does he know?” On Saturday, she also irked the Balochs by questioning their majority status in Balochistan while in another Tweet she warned the separatists not to “expect me to support an independent Balochistan”.

Public debate
Dr. Akbar S. Ahmed
, Pakistan’s former high commissioner to the United Kingdom, told Dawn.com that the congressional hearing was a “significant step” in highlighting Balochistan’s problems. “The information provided in the event,” he said, “will not only be used by members of the US Congress but will also be picked up by the world media.”

“The shocking stories of torture and murder in Balochistan will become part of the public debate. It is in the interest of Pakistan to quickly and effectively resolve the situation in Balochistan bringing back the Baluch with honor, respect and dignity,” said Dr Ahmed, who is currently the Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at the American University in Washington DC.

Dr Ahmed, who served in 1980s as the Commissioner of three districts in Balochistan, says the hearing can potentially create a great deal of negative publicity for Pakistan.

Close watchers
In the United States, the conflict in Balochistan has been gaining remarkable attention of late. While some officials from the government and non-governmental organizations have only expressed concern over the situation, other individuals, including former army soldiers, State department officials and members of the US Congress, have now begun to publicly assert support for an independent Balochistan.

For instance, on January 15, Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, expressed America’s “deep concern over the ongoing violence in Balochistan, especially targeted killings, disappearances and human rights violations.

“This (Balochistan) is a complex issue. We strongly believe that the best way forward is for all the parties to resolve their differences through peaceful dialogue,” she said.

Last year on November 16, the State Department deputy spokesman, Mark Toner, had also observed during a press briefing, “You know, more broadly, we do have concerns about the situation in Balochistan. We’ve addressed those concerns with the government of Pakistan.”

Nationalist view
Baloch nationalists are cautiously monitoring Wednesday’s hearing.

“To be honest, we are not very optimistic about this meeting,” Sardar Akhtar Mengal, a former chief minister of Balochistan, told Dawn.com, “but both support and attention from the US are significant because the presence of the US cannot be overlooked in South East Asia. It is essential that the US gives attention to Balochistan, as the aid that is given to Pakistan in the name of war against terror is being spent to commit atrocities in Balochistan.”

A political expert in Washington DC, who requested anonymity, said during the election year, the Republicans are likely to bring up the Balochistan issue to castigate Democratic President Barrack Obama for deliberately keeping quiet against Pakistan, an ally in the war on terror, for allegedly misusing American assistance to fight the secular Balochs instead of quashing the Taliban.

After the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, many American policymakers have become disillusioned with Pakistan and now some of them propose an independent Balochistan to fight religious extremism. Last month, Louie Gohmert, another Republican Congressman from Texas, suggested that the US should, “talk about creating a Balochistan in the southern part of Pakistan…they love us. They’ll stop the IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and all the weaponry coming into Afghanistan, and we got a shot to win over there.”

Sardar Mengal, who leads the largest Balochistan National Party (BNP), says the hearing does not mean that the Washington is going to support the Baloch cause in the future.

“What the US can do for us is to care for the Baloch as human beings. Since Washington is apparently a committed supporter of human rights, it is obligatory that the US should stop the genocide of the Baloch nation by the authorities as it has done in other parts of the world, supporting their right of self-determination.”

M. Chris Mason, a Senior Fellow at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, who recently retired from the US Foreign Service, has emerged as another ardent proponent of free Balochistan in the United States.

In an article, Mason, who lecturers at the prestigious National Defense University, argued an independent Balochistan would solve many of the [Af-Pak] region’s most intractable problems overnight and would create “a territorial buffer between rogue states Iran and Pakistan.”

“The answer to the current Pakistani train-wreck is… recognizing Balochistan’s legitimate claim to independence… to help the Baluchis go the way of the Bangladeshis in achieving their dream of freedom from tyranny, corruption and murder at the hands of the diseased state,” he wrote.

Routine matter
Hassan Abbas, a scholar based in Washington DC who until recently was Quaid-i-Azam Chair Professor at Columbia University in New York, seriously doubts if the US will officially support Baloch nationalists at this time as this will complicate US-Pakistan relations.

“I think the hearing is a routine matter as all security related issues in Pakistan are being analyzed in the policy world with keen interest as well as concern. The hearing will discuss human rights issue as well as politics,” says Abbas, who is also a Senior Advisor at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, “but the hearing itself will not create any serious diplomatic row. The US Congress must listen and understand that there is a variety of perspectives on the subject.”

Dr Ahmed, meanwhile, attributes the deepening crisis in Balochistan to Islamabad’s failure to understand that time is running out for it.

“The leaders of Pakistan are so focused on the power struggles in Islamabad that they seem to have little will or imagination to deal with the urgent issues that concern the country’s largest province of Balochistan.”

How will Islamabad respond to the hearing?

“Pakistan’s establishment is quite sensitive about the Balochistan crisis and they will follow the hearings closely and sceptically,” says Hassan Abbas, whose book, Pakistan’s Drift into Extremism, was published in 2005.

According to Abbas, hawkish elements in Pakistani media are likely to create a lot of hue and cry over the hearing. Yet he cautions, “They will serve Pakistan better by focusing on projecting the concerns of the ordinary Baloch people, who are disenfranchised, distressed and increasingly getting disenchanted.”

Sardar Mengal of BNP, who was detained in Karachi for several months during the Pervez Musharraf regime, predicts there would be a definite reaction from the government.

“They can only display their superiority to the ones who are weaker, and in this case, the Baloch are the weaker ones,” he says and warns, “But if there is a reaction from Pakistan toward us, this time it will be once and for all. Either the Baloch will swim across or sink as a nation.” (Courtesy: Dawn, Pakistan)

Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

Iran will probably retaliate against EU : Faisal Muhammed

Posted on 07 February 2012 by Tea Server

Antwerpen  (UNN) A  European based “Diplomatic Mediator” in  Belgium reject the idea that Pakistan will support Iran or involve in war if  Israel attacked on Iran, talking with Indian news …


Syndicated from: SeenReport

Comments (1)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Medina Charter of Prophet Muhammad and Pluralism

Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server




The original Madina Charter document does not exist but the most widely read version of the Constitution is found in the pages of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirah Rasul Allah (For English translation of the full text see wikisource),

The clash of civilizations, cultures, tribes, and religions seems to be prevalent throughout all of history. At the same time, history reveals simultaneous conflict and efforts to resolve tensions and division feeding animosity through mediation, diplomacy, and dialogue. Many conflicts seem too complicated for an agreement to be established on just one point, whether or not the conflict revolves around territory, religion, or ethnic discrimination. 

So what approach is best to mediate issues in a contemporary world that seems to be driven by economics, natural resources, and ethnic or religious ideologies? The Medina Charter serves as an example of finding resolve in a dispute where peace and pluralism were achieved not through military successes or ulterior motives but rather through respect, acceptance, and denunciation of war – aspects that reflect some of the basic tenets of the religion Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was guiding and promoting. Through an examination of the Medina Charter, I will show how pluralism was advanced and instated in Medina and the reasons reflecting on such a document could help avoid the divide and misunderstanding plaguing much thought, rhetoric, and media today between Muslims, Christians, and Jews all over the world.

When the Prophet was forced to immigrate to Medina, the population was “a mixture” (akhlat) of many different tribes (predominantly Arabic and Jewish), who had been fighting for nearly a century, causing “civil strife,” and it was for this reason that the Prophet was summoned there (Peters 1994, 4). Tribal fighting and a lack of governance in Medina (known as Yathrib) meant disputes were dealt with “by the blade” on many occasions, which deepened the divides and fueled conflicts. 


Karen Armstrong explains aptly the mentality and workings of the tribal system dispersed through war-torn Arabia, where the Prophet was striving for peace (Armstrong 2006, 19). “The tribe, not a deity, was of supreme value, and each member had to subordinate his or her personal needs and desires to the well-being of the group and to fight to the death, if necessary, to ensure its survival” 
(Armstrong 2006, 24). 
Such a system was, in a political sense, representative of the little cooperation between the tribes in the Yathrib. In this region reigned power hungry strategies, an emphasis on arms and strength in military, and a belief that clearly mediation was unachievable except by a trustworthy outsider who had no connections to the issues or the tribes. Not only did the Prophet fit these prerequisites, but his personal ambition as given to him by God was also one of spreading peace and unity, creating a community, or ummah, made up of diverse groups, through the teachings of the Quran and in the name of Islam.

The Quran states that the Lord “teaches by the pen” (96:1-5). This is indicative of the Medina Charter in that it is a reflection of these verses, which show that God is educating people and changing thought patterns through discussion. In this case, the discussion resulted in peace achieved through contemplation and through seeking agreements in which tribes felt they had benefited from the charter and had not been robbed of status or unresolved antagonism from the past. “Many Islamic rituals, philosophies, doctrines, [different interpretations of] sacred texts, and shrines are the result of frequently anguished and self-critical contemplation of the political events in Islamic society” (Armstrong 2006, 14). 

Islam places great emphasis on reason – the reasoning of the universe, of life, and indeed, of religion too. Al-Ghazzali (1058-1111) said, “Doubt is to find truth. Those who do not have doubt cannot think. Those who cannot think, cannot find truth.” Although this quote is more in reference to the philosophical side of Islam, it reverberates from the heart of reason – something that is central to Islam. 

Yetkin Yildirim writes about the use of one’s own knowledge and the absolute approach of reason. If the answer is neither in the Quran, Sunnah, or Hadith, then one’s own reasoning or ijtihad is required (Yildirim 2006, 109-117). So the Prophet, through the Medina Charter, was practicing Islam through action. For with reason, discussion, and contemplation, a peace treaty was created.


Quba Mosque in Madina. Considered to be the first Mosque in Islam. Date of photo unknown

The mere formation of the Charter and peace were tremendous feats, and the content of the Charter itself reflects this magnitude. The formation of an ummah through respect and acceptance resulting in pluralism shows us one of the ways in which the Prophet combated jahiliyyah, or ignorance – the state of mind causing violence and terror (Armstrong 2006, 19). Examining some of the clauses in the Charter also shows how the Prophet managed to take leadership and create a lasting peace. The first clause, “They are a single community (ummah),” (Sajoo 2009, 94) depicts the ultimate message and goal of the rest of the charter. It marked the creation of a community, and the Charter served as a unifying document in a city of diverse groups, cultures, religions, and languages. 

The Prophet came to Medina with tolerance – an aspect of Islam which is fundamental to the manner in which the religion operates in foreign lands. “It is for this tolerance in the Islamic view that Muslims have looked at the religion of the people in the lands they conquered with respect; they did not intervene with their beliefs nor touch their churches” (Can 2005, 172). Clause 25 epitomizes the level of tolerance in the charter and also serves as an example of Islam in practice. “The Jews … are a community (ummah) along with the believers. 

To the Jews their religion (din) and to the Muslims their religion” (Sajoo 2009, 96) This statement ties in with the verse from the Quran (2:256) which says, “There is no compulsion in religion.” For in the eyes of God, as it says in the Quran “… those who believe … Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans … and does right – surely their reward is with their Lord” (2:62).

The Medina Charter reflects pluralism both in the content and in the history of the document. F. E. Peters explains that “the contracting parties, although they did not embrace Islam, did recognize the Prophet’s authority, accepting him as the community leader and abiding by his political judgments” (Peters 1994, 199). 

As there is no account of an uprising in history books and because the Prophet was there at the suggestion of the tribes, we know that he was never rejected. Because of the laws he introduced, the existing groups clearly did not feel threatened by his new presence or his new governance. The society was pluralistic, and it was not repressive. 

The Prophet – as clause 25 shows – never imposed Islam upon the people of Medina, which meant that they could still practice without disruption their religions and customs, aspects of life that were important to them. He did not create an ummah through denouncing all ways of life except for Islam or by recognizing Islam as the singular religion; instead he united all inhabitants of the city under one banner of ethical living and moral principles – commonalities between all humans and all religions.

The Prophet drew upon the essence of unity, respect, tolerance, and love to combine and create a pluralistic community. Clause 40 exemplifies this: “The ‘protected neighbor’ (jar) is as the man himself so long as he does no harm and does not act treacherously” (Sajoo 2009, 97). People were safe and respected and free to exert their beliefs and would be protected in doing so. This protection, however, could not shield them from treachery or wrong doing.


The Medina Charter is arguably the first constitution ever written incorporating religion and politics (Yildirim 2006, 109-117). And even though the politics of the region have changed since it was written – in recent times for the worst – Islam’s values have continued to spread and are lived throughout the whole Muslim world. Despite the hold of power that some governments still have over their people, the true face of Islam shines through in how people live, communicate, and approach life. I speak from personal experiences when I traveled through Iran, Turkey, and Northern Iraq in January, 2009. 

And despite what the media had to say about the people in those lands, my time there was spent in the houses of complete strangers, who showered me with hospitality that transcended any I had experienced before. Although the governing body has changed, the points of the Medina Charter and tenets of Islam preached by Prophet Muhammad still exist amongst the people. My heritage was accepted with curiosity and respect – just as the Prophet implemented in Medina between the tribes. My place in the society was welcomed with honest enthusiasm, and I felt a part of a community – like the community that Prophet implemented in Medina. I was exposed to mainstream Islam, which we hear so little about in the West due to the confusion which unjustly joins Islam and extremism together. I saw tolerant Muslims who saw me as another person who wanted peace and respect – not treachery. This is what the Prophet also accomplished in Medina – a community which was not based upon religion or ethnicity but one built on unity and acceptance. One built on tolerance. One built on peace. It seems the Prophet was aware that spirituality and faith cannot be governed, and for this reason alone, he sought unity and respect as opposed to discriminating between tribes and their beliefs.

In contemporary times, an analysis of the Medina Charter can give us insight into Islam and religious pluralism (Sachedina 2001). Medina marked the first real occurrence of coexistence between religions and groups in Islam and mirrors the Quran which “in its entirety provides ample material for extrapolating a pluralistic and inclusive theology of religions” (Sachedina 2001, 26). 

The Quran is the unquestionable and the absolute; therefore, it is the key to understanding religious pluralism in Islam. Clause 39 of the Medina Charter says, “The valley of Yathrib is sacred for the people of this document” (Sajoo 2009, 97). And so too is the universe, which is sacred to all of humanity. The Quran reveals that “the people are one community” (2:213), so if we are one (which we are) in the world, in the universe, then regardless of religion, it is God’s mercy and compassion which will save us. By differentiating between beliefs, we neglect that under one sun we all pray to a greater entity, a greater being. We were all created by God, so unity seems imperative and practical.


The Medina Charter is very relevant to current tensions existing between the Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Unfortunately, it seems that ignorance and fear, suspicion and disrespect plague the interaction and stereotypes that exist between these three great Abrahamic religions. In the post-September 11th era, a new wave of antagonism has arisen, and people around the Western world generally fear Islam. Sadly, people confuse the actions of nationalists and fundamentalists, who so unjustly hide behind a Holy Book claiming that their intentions are those of God, with what the actual religion promotes. As Rumi believed, the essence of all religions is the same, for they all teach love. The deep philosophical and even deeper spiritual teaching of Rumi is based on a state of mind that seeks mutual vision and dialogue, which I hope will be achieved one day, breaking down the polarized world of different religious thought. Another verse of the Quran emphasizes this need for dialogue, unity, and tolerance: “Surely this community of yours is one community, and I am your Lord; so worship Me” (21:92).

The Prophets action’s in Medina prompt us to use reason in our approach to the wide, diverse beliefs of the world – from Europe to Asia, North, Central, and South America to Africa and everything in between.

 It prompts us to understand how “the spiritual space of the Quran [...] was shared by other religions” (Sachedina 2001, 23). Such an understanding reveals that Islam is a monotheistic religion that respects the rights of other faiths (Stewart 1994, 207). In a globalized world where we are connected so easily, unlike any other period in history, our mutual understanding of one another and our beliefs are the most important means to achieve peace and stability. 

It is in a contemporary sense, in a globalized world, that the Medina Charter is of such necessity. Inter-religious discussions took place with the Prophet in Medina, for Boase writes about a time when Christians performed their prayers in a mosque after a meeting with the Prophet during their visit (Boase 2005, 252). We can learn how in every country, a community, an ummah, is the single most effective way to produce a pluralistic state. The Medina Charter was a fusion of attributes which all world religions teach: peace, love, freedom, acceptance, and tolerance – resulting in stability.

Peace was achieved in Medina, not through the might of arms or the scale of wealth, but through the unyielding principles of Islam – tolerance, love, reason, and a belief in God – whether the God in the Bible, the Quran, or the Torah. 

The Medina Charter, arguably the first charter ever written, shows that Islam rejects the use of compulsion in religion and violence and that over centuries of human existence, the most effective way to resolve conflicts comes through mediation. 

The Medina Charter is an example that should be discussed and referred to in current conflicts. The creation of a community, or ummah, offers pluralism to everyone. For people are not judged on their beliefs, but on their actions. Persecution is the instigator of all tensions, and reason and tolerance is the essence of all peace. Just as in the streets of Medina, through tolerance and respect, we too may one day have a world-wide ummah, where a passing Christian will say, “Peace be upon you” to a Muslim, who will reply, “Peace be upon you too.”

**********

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Attack on Iran ”would be disaster”, must talk: Turkey

Posted on 06 February 2012 by Tea Server

MUNICH: Turkey and Qatar urged the West on Sunday not to attack Iran to solve a nuclear row, but to make greater efforts to negotiate an end to the dispute. Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, a gathering of security officials and diplomats, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said an attack would be a “disaster” [...]

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leon Panetta Believes Israel May Strike Iran This Spring

Posted on 04 February 2012 by Tea Server



United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta believes there is a growing possibility Israel will attack Iran as early as April to stop Tehran from building a nuclear bomb, according to reports. 

 The Washington Post first reported that Panetta was concerned about the increased likelihood Israel would launch an attack over the next few months. CNN said it confirmed the report, citing a senior
Obama administration official, who declined to be identified. 

 


"Panetta believes there is a strong likelihood that Israel will strike Iran in
April, May or June – before Iran enters what Israelis described as a 'zone
of immunity' to commence building a nuclear bomb," Washington Post columnist
David Ignatius wrote.

"Very soon, the Israelis fear, the Iranians will have stored enough enriched
uranium in deep underground facilities to make a weapon – and only the
United States could then stop them militarily," Ignatius wrote.

Ignatius did not cite a source. He was writing from Brussels where Panetta was
attending a NATO defense ministers' meeting. 

READ MORE

Syndicated from: ASIAN DEFENCE NEWS

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , ,

Is world moving towards WW3 ( World War 3 ) ?

Posted on 04 February 2012 by Tea Server

Currently, we can see tensions all around the globe. We hear the news of US striking to Pakistan, India striking to China or Israel striking to Iran.

No doubt, if these are not just rumors then there is going to be WW3. WW3 might not destroy the world but can bring a great change to economy of world and might cause complete destruction of any country.

Take a look at the following articles.

Syndicated from: PAKISTAN DEFENCE BLOG

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Iran & Israel – Diplomatic Road Rage

Posted on 04 February 2012 by Tea Server

US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s assertion that Israel is preparing to attack Iran in either April, May, or June has added more speculation and fuel to the sensitive situation surrounding Iran’s nuclear program. David Ignatius’ article in The Washington Post provides us with a bit of evidence that Israel may be preparing for war, demonstrated by its cancelation of a military exercise with US forces that would conclude in May. News that the IAEA was not as pleased with its most recent trip to Iran may also further erode the chances for peace.

Returning to Ignatius’ article, one should pay special attention to Israeli’s thoughts on how Iran would likely respond to a strike on its nuclear facilities. Ignatius notes that some Israelis opine Israel’s attack on Syria’s suspected nuclear facility is an exemplar for how Iran will respond: mainly, do nothing. Moreover, some assert that the Iranian government would be ousted, similar to what occurred in 1976 following Israeli’s hostage rescue in Uganda. If these are honest opinions of important decision makers in Israel, we should be gravely concerned.

Iran would likely not sit back and allow Israel to escape unscathed, nor would the regime be toppled. Evidently it would leverage non-state assets, such as its relationships with Hezbollah, HAMAS, and other Palestinian actors, to pummel Israel, and its populace would unite behind it. It would also likely use IRGC-Quds Force hit squads to target Israeli interests abroad. The US would face a complex dilemma if Iran uses the Quds Force in such a manner, as well as if Iran counter-attacked by striking Israel overtly.

The state of diplomacy between Iran, Israel, and the US demonstrates how the West and Israel’s attempts to use the IAEA, UN, and sanctions against Iran have failed to encourage cooperation. Apparent diplomatic road rage has set in between at least Iran and Israel, which will likely prove deleterious for peace.

Thursday, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak again sought to frame the debate as one of preemptive action to safeguard Israel: ”Whoever says ‘later’, could find that it is too late”, Barak stated. Additionally, the head of the Shin Bet, while not admitting Israel’s culpability, said on Thursday that Iran will likely seek retaliation for recent assassinations of Iranian civilian and military personnel involved in its nuclear program so that it can deter future Israeli action.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, countered in his televised Friday speech that Iran will respond in kind when appropriate, and that sanctions will not alter Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Khamenei furthered that sanctions, in fact, have encouraged Iran’s military to become more self-reliant. It does not appear that Iran will be backing into any corner, furthermore, in light of its intention to double defense spending and expand its diplomatic (and hence intelligence) presence in Africa, as well as its new Spanish speaking television channel, “Hispan TV”.

(Photo Credit: Behrouz Mehri from AFP/Getty Images, 3 June 2011).

 

Comments (0)

Register your blog:

Enter your blog address below to become a part of the TeaBreak network.

About TeaBreak:

TeaBreak.pk is a blog aggregator that syndicates pakistani blogs and categorizes them appropriately. Our mission is to give our readers a break from work and let them enjoy their blog time. And we are doing this by bringing all the popular blogs of Pakistan on one platform.