Khilafah magazine-july-2011

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

RAJAB 1432 - SHA'BAN 1432 A.H. ··· JULY 2011 ··· ISSUE: 17

THE ARAB SPRING - A PRINCIPLED STANCE - THE THREE FACES OFISLAMOPHOBIA - PREVENT: RADICALLY THE SAME - UPRISING IN THEARAB WORLD & THE POLITICAL ROLE OF MUSLIM WOMEN -COUNTERING THE SAUDI ATTEMPT TO SILENCE THE WORD OFTRUTH - IS AMERICA THE NEW ‘SICK MAN?’ - WATER DISTRIBUTIONUNDER THE KHILAFAH

Global Call forChange

NEWSBITES

2 :: Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 www.khilafah.eu

UK TRAINING SAUDI FORCES USED TOCRUSH ARAB SPRINGThe Observer newspaper in the UK hasrevealed that Britain is training the Saudinational guard that has been deployed tocrush opposition protests in Bahraindespite the Foreign office accepting theSaudi human rights record as a “majorconcern”. Britain sends approx. 20training teams annually for “weapons,fieldcraft, military skills, public order andsniper training”.

The revelations came in the same weekthat the G8 approved funding forcountries embracing representative rule,highlighting the hyprocrisy of Britishforeign policy as Jonathan Edwards MPcalled in the UK House of Commons:

“I find it difficult to understand whyBritain was training troops for repressiveundemocratic regimes. This is theshocking face of our democracy to manypeople in the world, as we prop upregimes of this sort”, Edwards said. “It isintensely hypocritical of our leadershipin the UK – Labour or Conservative – totalk of supporting freedoms in theMiddle East and elsewhere while at thesame time training crack troops ofdictatorships”.

A ministry of Defence spokesmandescribed the Gulf states as “keypartners” in the fight against terrorism.

FORMER PAKISTAN INTELLIGENCECHIEF ACCUSES THE USHamid Gul formerly head of the ISI toldthe UK Channel 4 news that he is “100percent sure” that a recent attack on theheadquarters of a naval base in Karachiwhere 13 were killed was an “Americanoperation”. Gul who was the head of theISI from 1987 to 1989 said:

“The Karachi incident was clearly an

operation by special forces, it must havetaken months to plan, and the level ofintelligence gathered is far toosophisticated for it to have been a raidby al-Qaeda or the Taliban… Thereconnaissance and the surveillance totarget three or four planes is far tooadvanced”. Adding later that “instabilityin Pakistan is the price for Americanfriendship. There have been betrayals byAmericans in the past, and there will bebetrayals by Americans in the future.Absolutely they want to destabilisePakistan because they want jointcustody of nukes, to consolidate theirposition in the region, so a Karachi navalblockade is a natural move”.

GUANTANAMO LEAKED DOCS REVEALTHE AWFUL TRUTHInnocents held and interrogated foryears. Children, elderly and the mentallyill wrongfully held. The UK Guardiannewspaper reported in late April on over700 leaked secret files which expose theinnermost workings of the camp. Thefiles reveal a system focused more ongathering intelligence rather thancontaining accused terrorists. Amonginmates were an 89-year-old Afghanvillager, suffering from senile dementia,and a 14-year-old innocent kidnapvictim.

Other revelations included that nearly100 inmates were recognized as havingmental illnesses, many attempted suicide.Many were held with no evidence ofconnection to terrorism – one beingheld solely because he had intelligenceof Taliban interrogations. Reliance uponinformation obtained under torture waswidespread and in many cases despitedefinitive proof that detainees had nolinks to the Taliban or al-Qaida they werestill held. An Al-Jazeera journalist was

held for 6 years merely to beinterrogated about the news network.With 172 still in custody despiteObama’s promise to close the prison,Guantanomo continues to be a severeblot on the US’s ambitions to carry itsvalues globally.

REPORT CONFIRMS THE TARGETING OFUS MUSLIMS IN TERROR CASESUS government use of surveillance, paidinformants and invented terrorism plotsprompts human rights concerns,according to a report by NYU's Centerfor Human Rights and Global Justice.After examining three high-profile casesin the New York area they highlightedthe role of the FBI and New York PoliceDepartment in creating the perceptionof a homegrown terrorism threat(reports the LA Times on 19th of May).

The American Civil Liberties Union andthe Council on American-IslamicRelations have filed suits against the FBI,alleging that it used a paid informant toinfiltrate several Southern Californiamosques and “indiscriminately collect”personal information on thousands ofMuslims. This operation, which began in2006, resulted in perjury andnaturalization fraud charges against onemember that were later dismissed.

“It's clear the FBI is targeting peoplewith no basis to believe they areinvolved in criminal activity,” said PeterBibring, lead ACLU attorney for theIrvine lawsuit. “It’s both a poor use oflimited law enforcement resources andan invitation for ethnic and religiousprofiling.”�

During this past month the momentumfor change across the Middle East hasnot slowed. Opposition to the Assadregime in Syria has escalated; AliAbdullah Saleh was forced to leaveYemen; opponents of Gaddafi continueto resist him; and the harsh sentencemeted out by the regime in Bahrainwere met by more protests.

But added to this has been Hizb ut-Tahrir's sustained called for change. Foralmost sixty years this Islamic party hasled the way in non-violent politicalstruggle, following the Propheticexample. Whilst, others praised thearmy in Egypt for not slaughtering thepeople as they do in Syria, Hizb ut-Tahrir has made winning the armedforces part of its method, just as theProphet (alayhi salatu wassalam) triedto win over the most powerful factionsin society as well as the general public.

This past month, Hizb ut-Tahrir heldhuge conferences in Indonesia fillingdozens of sports stadia, with the totalnumber of delegates attending close to

200,000. At the same time, respondingto the call for change, Sisters andBrothers led demonstrations in Jordan,Denmark, Holland, Australia and London- opposing the Russian state'soppression of Muslims - highlightingthe case of Sister Sidikova.

In this month's magazine, we profilesome of these demonstrations as well aslooking at the volatile geopoliticalsituation of the Arab uprisings and thedecline of America in the world.

But just as the masses and good peoplemove for change, there are those whowork to oppose change and the Islamicrevival in this Ummah.

We expose and refute the Saudiregime's attempts to label the Arabuprisings as illegitimate from an Islamicperspective. Also, we expose the Britishgovernment's "Prevent" strategy (toprevent the Islamic revival not toprevent violent extremism as theypretend), as well as the rise ofIslamophobia in the West - and its

causes.

As we go to press, Muslims can see theupper ranks of the Pakistani army havebeen infiltrated by people who wish toexecute America's agenda in the region- and wish to purge the army's ranks ofany principled opposition or Islamicsentiment. They demonise a party thatstands for non-violent change, Muslimunity, Islamic government, justice andaccountability; an educated populationand a technologically advanced state;that supports the masses and notWestern interests.

Those who oppose will plan and plotto stop it. But they cannot and will not.For Allah plots and plans - and He(SWT) is the Best of Planners.�

Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 3www.khilafah.eu

EditorialDR. ABDUL WAHID

The Global Callfor Change

It has been an incredible year so far. Wehave witnessed seismic events takeplace in the Muslim world. Eventswhich we hoped to see, but which wethought would not happen in ourlifetimes. Despot by despot; town bytown; country by country; people haverisen up against tyranny in their tens ofthousands.

The story began in 2010 in Tunisia with

a young market seller namedMohammed Bouazizi who washumiliated when an official confiscatedhis market stall. This though is not aone off incident. It is the kind ofhumiliation that takes place every dayin the Muslim world – the persistenttyranny of governments that deny theircitizens dignity, opportunity and thetools they need for prosperity. Only thistime, Mohammed had other ideas. After

the regime refused to hear hiscomplaints, he went to the office of theprovincial government, starting a chainof events which would cause him to beburnt alive.

The determined actions of individualstoday are not unique. In the course ofhistory, the actions of the Anbiyah havesparked movements for political changerooted in the just message of Allah


The Arab Spring- A Principled Stance

SAJJAD KHAN

(swt). Think of the young Ibrahim (as),who stood in defiance against thosewho blindly supported the power ofthe idols in the temple, or the braveryof Musa (as) as he stood and challengedthe powerful and arrogant Firaun in hisown court. Or the events that started inTunisia, as Mohammed’s act ofdesperation tapped into the frustrationfelt by all throughout the Muslim world.Hundreds of protesters took to thestreets, then thousands, then tens ofthousands. And in the face of tear gas,batons and bullets, they refused to gohome – day after day, week after week,until dictators who ruled for decadeswere forced from power.

The story of frustration should not havecome as a surprise. The nations of theMuslim world won their so calledindependence a long time ago, but theybecame corrupt dictatorships,neglected their peoples and becameruthless political tools of westerngovernments. In too many countries, acitizen like Mohammed had nowhere toturn – no honest government to hearhis case; no independent judiciary togive him a voice; no transparentelection where he could choose hisleader.

This is despite the fact that parts of theMuslim world are abundantly blessedwith wealth in oil, gas and otherresources, which has led to prosperityfor the ruling elites. But in a globaleconomy based on knowledge,telecommunication and innovation, thewealth of a nation is not found inresources in the ground but in the skillsand talents of its people. Yet people cannever reach their potential whenwealth, opportunity and education onlycirculate amongst the chosen few. The question before us is, what do wemake of what has happened in recentmonths? Is what we have seen, thepermanent change that people want?And what role should we now play toshape future events? For decades, thedespots of the Muslim world havepursued a set of narrow interests whichhave sidelined its own people: securingthe free flow of commerce for the west,fighting against the Islamic revival and

standing up for Israel's security at theexpense of the Palestinians.Yet now, after decades of despotic ruleand western interference, the politicalsituation is in flux and we now have anunprecedented opportunity to finallyshape the path to substantive change.But as we do, we must expose somemyths that have gained currency overrecent months.

It is clear that though there have beenchanges of leadership in the region,there have been no changes of regime.In Tunisia and Egypt we have seen theregime of Ben Ali and Mubarak remainin place, even though the leadersthemselves are now out of power. It is also incorrect to argue that theWest put people on to the streets ofTunis, Cairo or Benghazi, nor was it thepower of social networking sites suchas Facebook or Twitter – it was thepeople themselves who launched thesemovements, who braved the bullets andit is they who are responsible for thechange.

Attempts to claim the Arab Spring isakin to the fall of the Berlin Wall arecorrect in one sense. In the Cold War

the USSR supported the discreditedregimes in Berlin, Prague and Budapest.Today the West does the same with thedespotic regimes in Riyadh, Amman andSanaa.

Indeed the West who supported thedespotic governments of the regionshould not receive a free pass. Theysupported these regimes for clearstrategic reasons. These strategicreasons survive today. It is for thosesame strategic reasons that the Westsupported Mubarak, and why todaythey support the leaders of SaudiArabia, Bahrain and call Assad areformer. It is for these strategic reasonsthey support the apartheid regime inTel Aviv and allow it to be a nuclearmonopoly while lecturing others in theregion. It is those reasons why theybomb Libya yet do nothing whilecivilians are killed in Zimbabwe, NorthKorea and Burma.

It is also clear that the apartheid regimein Tel Aviv has no better friends thanthe tyrants in Cairo, Damascus andAmman. The Israelis realise that thoughthey can make peace with despots inpalaces, they cannot make peace with


SAJJAD KHAN

the masses on the street. The Muslimworld is not interested in appeasing oraccepting Israel’s illegal occupation andwill not rest until this is reversed.In addition one of the key reasons forpeople’s discontent is the lack ofeconomic opportunity. Yet the samecrony capitalism that was practicedbefore, is being now advocated again.

The use of the IMF, World Bank and aidprograms are also designed to keep thestates weak and dependent on the West.Unless the resources of the region areused for the people of the region, no

substantive economic change willoccur. Unless corruption ends,innovation cannot start. Unless westerninstitutions stop interfering, domesticinstitutions can never mature.

It is also not for the West to force theirparticular values of secular democracy.The principle of detaching religionfrom state is deep rooted in London,Washington and Paris but is foreign toCairo, Damascus and Istanbul. Liberalvalues rooted in individual freedom thatspawn corporate capitalism, sexualfreedom and pure individualismemanate from the west’s peculiarideology and are alien to the people ofthe region.

Accountable governments under theKhilafah system are rooted in Islam’seternal values and have led toprosperity, justice and respect forminorities and women over the ages.Science, architecture and tradeblossomed under the Khilafah and cando so once again. It is thereforeincumbent on Muslims to speak out forIslam’s core principles – principles thatshould guide our response to thecontinuing events:

For instance Muslims should opposethe use of violence and repressionagainst any individual whether done bynon state actors, the despots in the

Muslim world or carried out by Westernmilitary forces.

We should support a clear set of values.These values include the right to electone’s ruler; the right to protest withoutfear of reprisal; that minorities shouldbe protected; that no one is above thelaw and that wealth should not beconcentrated amongst a privileged elite– whether you live in Tunis, Cairo orDamascus.

And finally, we support the liberation of

Muslim lands from foreign occupationto ensure justice is given to those whohave seen their properties stolen, theirlands annexed and their dearest killed.Our support for these principles shouldnot oscillate with the political winds–nor should they be sacrificed at thealter of political expediency, or in somevain attempt to appease the west. Thewest never compromises on their coreprinciples, nor should we.

Those principles must guide ourresponse to the change that istransforming the Muslim world – wordswhich tell us that dictatorship will fail,that western interference will fall, andthat every man and woman regardlessof their creed, colour or race will betreated with justice. As the life of ourProphet Muhammad (saw) showed us,the journey will not be easy, realpolitical change never is. There is noeasy path to progress, no shortcuts toreal change and hardship alwaysaccompanies the task.

But this Ummah is founded on thebelief that implementing a systemanchored in divine revelation does nothave to contradict with the modernworld. That our vision of leadership, isone that is elected by the people, notappointed by the clergy. Where thosethat are weakest in society, are thosethat require most looking after.

This is why we cannot remain silenttoday, this is why we cannot look away,this is why we will not stand asidewhile women are raped, while townsare oppressed and while children areorphaned.

As Allah (swt) commanded: “And if you rule, rule with justicebetween them. Verily, Allah loves thosewho act justly” [Translated Meaning ofthe Qur’an - al-Ma’ida:42]�

SAJJAD KHAN

www.khilafah.eu6 :: Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011

Indeed the West who supported the despotic governments ofthe region should not receive a free pass. They supportedthese regimes for clear strategic reasons.

A version of this article wasoriginally published on thewebsite New Civilisation inJune 2011

When British Prime Minister DavidCameron addressed a securityconference in Munich in February 2011,he criticised multiculturalism and calledfor a more ‘muscular liberalism’.Cameron has not been alone in attackingmulticulturalism. German ChancellorAngela Merkel was forced to makenegative comments on the policy byrising tensions and political debate

within Germany. Critics pointed out thatCameron failed to criticise the EnglishDefence League, a militant anti-Muslimgroup, who held a huge rally the sameweekend as his Munich speech.Multiculturalism was a policy adopted inBritain in response to rising racialtensions in the 1960s and 1970s. Manyinformed commentators fear that,whatever the motivation, abandoningthis policy – which was supposed tolead to greater social cohesion – willopen the door to more racism; a concernreinforced with the approval by MarineLe Pen, the leader of France’s NationalFront party, for Cameron’s comments.

But, as many critics of Islam point out,Islam is not a race. It is a set of beliefsand values that cross the boundaries ofrace. So, it is argued, it cannot be racismthat drives a dislike of Islam.

This is not wholly true. Islam is, indeed,not a race. But whilst Islamophobia isnot a monolithic phenomenon, asignificant part is without doubt nothingless than the base tribalism of the kindwe see most commonly amongst racists.Islamophobia needs to be understood ifconcerned individuals hope to formulatean appropriate response. In my viewthere are three distinct faces ofIslamophobia. I define Islamophobia asthose who are critical of orthodoxIslamic laws and values, rather thanthose who simply look at it all as a kindof “racism”, which I believe is notproductive.

With that definition, the first form ofIslamophobia is what might be labelledas old-fashioned European xenophobia,which is what the term Islamophobiahas come to commonly represent. Thesecond is the Islamophobia of liberalswho, who wish to express (as they seeit) the superiority of liberal values andtheir criticism of Islam throughcomment, dialogue and debate. The thirdtype uses policy tools to establish thesuperiority of liberal values over Islam;and this last group includes the‘muscular liberals’ like Cameron andBlair. This is the most destructive face of

7 :: Khilafah Magazine :: September 2010www.khilafah.eu Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 7

The Three Facesof Islamophobia

DR ABDUL WAHID

Islamophobia, because it is built on falsearguments and can cause huge damagein terms of community relations, thestability of the Muslim world, anddamage in terms of loss of life andliberty.

Old-fashion European XenophobiaEurope has a poor history on itstreatment of minorities. Much of thecurrent commentary about Muslims isreminiscent of the way Black people,Jews, Gypsies or the Irish were treatedin generations gone by – and in somecases even today.

The themes of the criticism aboutMuslims usually centre on changing thecharacter of Britain, imposing non-Britishvalues, refusing to integrate, takingresources from the state etc. This is thelanguage of the BNP or EDL whocamouflage their attacks on Islam withthe language of defending the English orBritish people.

This narrative is reinforced by thetabloid media who have, in some cases,actually manufactured negative storiesabout Muslims; or at other times reportupon every negative facet of thebehaviour of Muslims in a manner thatlinks to their Islamic identity, whichreinforces popular prejudice.This form of Islamophobia generates themost rigorous opposition. There is, inpart, protection in law fromdiscrimination and incitement to hatred.Moreover, anti-racist groups, the left andthose with a strong moral consciencedislike the rise in xenophobic hatred. So,many Muslims think it is important tobuild alliances and address this kind ofIslamophobia.

However, the danger in concentrating onthis face of Islamophobia alone is tomiss the altogether more sinister state-led and policy driven Islamophobia. Moreover, most of the people that fallinto this camp are ignorant (jahil)people, and Allah SWT tells us:“And the servants of Al-Rahman arethose who walk on the earth inhumility, and when the ignorant (jahilpeople) address them, they say, "Peace!"[Translated meaning of Quran 25:63]

Whilst there is a legitimate need toprotect our families, our masajid etc –there is a clear lesson in this ayah of theQuran not to respond unnecessarily toignorant abuse.

LIBERAL EVANGELICALSEvangelism is asserting the superiority ofone’s beliefs. But it is not restricted toreligion.

There are critics of Islam who are notignorant racists. They want to criticisethe ideas of Islam that they disagreewith from their own liberal worldview.Their aim is not usually to demoniseMuslims, who carry these ideas.Their commentary can be perceived asIslamophobic because it is set against abackdrop of politically drivenpropaganda. Yet their criticisms are partof a debate of ideas rather than ignorantxenophobia or part of a wider politicalagenda.

Liberal evangelicals, who dominate thecolumns of the liberal broadsheets andthe corridors of the BBC, can be

extremely consistent in challengingilliberal ideas from any source – whetherChristian or socially conservative.

This small group will uphold their creedto defend the right of people to saywhat they want to say, even though theymight disagree with them.

But this means that this group of peoplewould also be the first to champion therights of Salman Rushdie, Theo van Goghand others who use free expression toinsult the sanctities of Islam.

These people deal in ideas; and theresponse to them should be in terms ofideas. That is how Allah and HisMessenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)dealt with the criticisms in terms ofideas in the Makkan era of the blessedProphet’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)

mission.

This group warrant’s argument anddebate in the best manner, as mentionedin the ayah of Quran. “Invite to the Way of your Lord withwisdom and beautiful preaching; andargue with them in ways that are bestand most gracious: for your Lordknows best, who have strayed from HisPath, and who receive guidance.”[Translated meaning of Quran16:125]

Liberal evangelical Islamophobiarequires engaging in a debate of ideas –and for the best idea to win. But thisrequires the Muslim community toadhere to the values that are underattack in a public manner, and to defendthem intellectually.

The ‘Cold War’ Warriors of the StateThe third group of people are thosewho wish to see the dominance ofsecular liberal ideas over Islam – withinBritain and across the world but whatdistinguishes them from the liberalsmentioned before is that they do not

trust liberalism to win the debate onintellectual grounds.

Instead, they use the power of the State,and their influence in the media, topursue policies that secure thedominance of liberalism and thesuppression of Islam. They are willing toplay dirty, and pursue policies thatfundamentally contradict the values theypurport to uphold, which are foundedupon deeply flawed – even false –premises. They have played to the basestinstincts of the common man to createan environment that is hostile to Islam.They have mimicked the McCarthyistpolicies of the Cold War era in order tocreate fear, and so hope to keep theMuslim community in check throughthis climate of fear.

In a recent column in the Evening


DR ABDUL WAHID

This group of Islamophobes believes in an ideological attack using thefull force of the State – including the use of military force if it meanscontaining the rise of Islam as a political force in the Muslim world –and some elements of civil society as well, in order to secure victory.

Standard newspaper following thepublication of the Prevent review, theright-wing columnist Matthew d’Anconawrote that “this struggle more closelyresembles the Cold War than the Troublesin Northern Ireland. The most importantargument advanced by the rebootedPrevent strategy is that the struggle againstterrorism is, at root, a battle of ideologies”.

This view is widespread amongstpoliticians, and pushed by right wing thinktanks. This group of Islamophobes believesin an ideological attack using the full forceof the State – including the use of militaryforce if it means containing the rise ofIslam as a political force in the Muslimworld – and some elements of civil societyas well, in order to secure victory.

But if they have their way they will destroyeven further the very ideas and values theyclaim they seek to uphold.This British government, like itspredecessor, has decided they wish topolice ideas and political views. That issomething that is supposed to be ‘haram’in liberal societies.

They have decided to sideline, evendemonise, those who have nothing to dowith violence but who hold firm to coreIslamic beliefs – so contradicting thepluralism they claim to believe in.“Extremism” says the government’s Preventreview document “is vocal or activeopposition to fundamental British values,including democracy, the rule of law,individual liberty and mutual respect andtolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”

This definition is complete hypocrisy. Theadvocates of such policies haveundermined the rule of law in theirapproach to Muslims within the UK andabroad, in pursuit of their ‘War on Terror’.They have removed the individual libertyof many with the imposition of detentionwithout trial. They have shown littlerespect or tolerance for those who haveperfectly reasonable and rational beliefsand values that conflict with the currentdominant view [though not necessarilymajority view] in Britain or Europe. Whereis the respect and tolerance for womenwearing hijab and niqab? Or for mosquesbearing minarets in Switzerland? Or for thereligious sensitivities of millions of peoplewhen desecrating the Quran, or vilifyingtheir beloved Prophet?

‘EXTREMIST’ BELIEFSMr d’Ancona identifies these. Some werementioned in the Prevent reviewdocument and some were leaked fromconfidential sources under the previousadministration. They include “therestoration of the Islamic Caliphate, thedestruction of Israel and the globalimposition of Sharia law”. These arecaricatures of the beliefs of many Muslims,exaggerated for full fear effect.The restoration of the Khilafah is a widelyheld general aspiration amongst hugenumbers of Muslims – although thenumbers who actively promote this as animmediate political programme are fewer.The Khilafah holds a central position inIslam.

The destruction of the Khilafah after WorldWar One heralded the subsequentdisintegration of the Muslim world intochaos.

What is labelled the ‘destruction’ of Israelis what Muslims refer to as the liberationof occupied Palestine. When Argentinaoccupied the Falkland Islands or Hitleroccupied France, people wanted liberation– and not the ‘destruction’ of the pro-Argentine regime or the ‘destruction’ of theVichy regime – only liberation. Muslims donot wish to see a “Jewish-free” Palestine;just one where the oppressive and racistZionist regime is abolished, and justiceestablished in the region. Yet, it isgovernment policy to silence this validpolitical opinion.

What is referred to as the ‘globalimposition of Sharia law’ is the adoption ofa legal code, described by the politicalthinker and British parliamentarianEdmund Burke as “a law interwoven with asystem of the wisest, the most learned, andmost enlightened jurisprudence thatperhaps ever existed in the world”.This group of Islamophobes know that thereturn of the Khilafah, the implementationof Sharia in terms of governance andeconomics, would mean a loss of controlover the Muslim world and its resources. Itis not about terrorism, or the safety of theircitizens. It is about suppressing theaspirations of hundreds of millions for thesake of corporate security.

So, they have created a ‘McCarthyite’climate, where to declare belief in thesevalues that are attacked and criticised, sees

people labelled as ‘extremists’ and a merestone’s throw away from being a ‘terrorist’.

But, for Muslims, upholding these values isessential. For abandoning these valueswould bring humiliation in this world andthe next. In fact, why does any Muslim think an anti-racist liberal campaigner would botherdefending values they disagree with, whenMuslims don’t stand up for them eventhough they are supposed to believe inthem!

These politicians, think tanks and sectionsof the media who use lies, smear, fear andpropaganda, as well as the institutions ofstate to achieve their ends – have to beexposed for what they are.

Their arguments need to be challengedand undermined. The destructive capacityfor their policies needs to be made clearfor all.

Their double standards, trampling andsoiling the very values they claim tosupport, needs to be seen by all. The Muslim community needs to beunited, despite government attempts toforce divisions

“And hold fast, all together, by the rope ofAllah and be not divided amongyourselves” [Translated meaning of Quran3:103]

Moreover, Muslims must be confident in itsown identity – then engage with others onthis basis.

“Who is better in speech than one whocalls (men) to Allah, works righteousness,and says, ‘Verily, I am of the Muslims’?”[Translated meaning Quran 41:33]

Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 9

DR ABDUL WAHID

www.khilafah.eu

There was nothing radically differentabout the “radically different strategy” toprevent people being drawn into violentextremism, which was unveiled by theUK Home Secretary Theresa May inParliament on 7th June 2011.

The core elements of Prevent, whichwere introduced by the Labourgovernment in the aftermath of 9/11 –remain unchanged:

• It targets the Muslimcommunity.

• It is based on promoting asecular state-sponsored Islam strategy andproviding a platform only for ‘moderates’who subscribe to this doctrine.

• The strategy maintains spynetworks across a multitude ofinstitutions, to inform the authorities ofthose who show ‘signs or are susceptible’of extremist behaviour and influence.

• The strategy convenientlyignores the primary cause that has beenattributed to the growth of radicalisationi.e. UK foreign policy, which has beenaired by many political commentators,ordinary citizens; even ministers in thegovernment: “To pretend what happensabroad has no impact is nonsense.” (LordWest, Security Minister in 2009)

“But I do believe that foreign policy issometimes a motivating factor inradicalisation of young Muslims and thepotential recruitment to terror. It is better

to be frank about it.” (Peter Reid, HomeSecretary in 2006)

The only element that Theresa Mayintroduced, which could be considered asnew was the reference to tackling ‘non-violent extremism’. This adjustment infocus was inevitable for a number ofreasons:

• It was the direction that theprevious government had alreadyadopted, but had not announced publicly.

• The Prevent Strategy has beenan abysmal failure, for it was evident that‘extremists’ were few and far between.Prevent has always been seen as aconvenient cover that allowed thegovernment to create a climate ofintimidation for the Muslim communityand for the government to pursue its realtarget i.e. those who offered Islamicintellectual and political enlightenmentand alternatives.

• The concern for governments iswhen Muslims begin to redefinethemselves within an Islamic paradigmand assert their Islamic identity beyondthe spiritual and secular confines, whichthey had inherited and/or was imposedupon them. This concern was has beenconsistently raised in the BritishParliament over a number of decades andGordon Brown, former Prime Ministerstated, "It is also a struggle of ideas andideals that in the coming years will bewaged and won for hearts and mindshere at home and round the world."

It is an uncomfortable position forgovernments as Muslims openly questionand seek debate on the legitimacy andapplication of secular values andchallenge the brutal and hypocriticalforeign policy that western governmentshave adopted in the Muslim world. Tosilence Muslims has become acornerstone policy of the governmentand we should all expect that ‘non-violentextremism’ will become a much usedhousehold political expression.

However, the announcement of the ‘newstrategy’ will do little to provide re-assurance to the Muslim community,already battling with discrimination,


Prevent:Radically thesame

BURHAN HANIF

intimidation and victimisation that theexisting Prevent strategy has created.Likewise, the announcement just adds tothe increasingly held belief by Muslimsand society in general that it isincreasingly common for the governmentto abdicate and contradict coreprinciples:

• An ethical foreign policy hasbeen ignored for the sake of protectingBritish material interests by supportingbrutal regimes and turning a blind eyeand outsourcing torture. (In truth, there isno such thing as a secular ethical foreignpolicy)

• Britain abandoned sacred freemarket principles in order to save banksand protect and reward those that wereresponsible for the economic crisis thatengulfed the world economies andresulted in millions of ordinary peopleseeing their wealth and homes takenaway i.e. the bankers.

• The government selectivelyapplies ‘freedom of speech’ whilstdeclaring itself as its most ardentguardian – yet it actively seeks to deprivepeople from holding thoughts andexpressing themselves within theintellectual and political arena. Arrogantlyand quite without evidence propoundingthat non-violent Islamic political thoughts(Islamism they call it) will lead toterrorism. An approach that can be usedto silence any political views thegovernment dislikes.

It is interesting to note that part of thestrategy to tackle extremism, involvespromoting integration, “...includingthrough teaching our history and valuesin our schools...”What will be taught in terms of historyby the government to encourageintegration? • The bloody wars that Englandengaged in and the brutal treatment andexploitation of those it conquered?

• The mistreatment of those wholived in Scotland and Ireland?

• The truth of the brutal trackrecord of the British Empire, which isetched in the histories of those

continents whose indigenous populations(in America, Africa, Asia and Australasia)were not spared from the criminalcolonial foreign policy – includinggenocides, massacres, rape, exploitation,torture, subjugation, the appropriation oflands and the installation of despoticrulers to govern on their behalf?Entitled ‘Genocide in Australia’, ProfessorColin Tatz, wrote that though no officialfigures exist, estimates of the Aboriginalpopulation in 1788 range between250,000 and 750,000. By 1911 thenumber was 31,000.

• Will students be taught that SirWinston Churchill, named the greatestBriton of all time in a nationwide poll in2002, supported the use of poisonous gas,

stating “I do not understand thissqueamishness about the use of gas. I amstrongly in favour of using poison gasagainst uncivilised tribes”. He also said:“I do not agree that the dog in a mangerhas the final right to the manger eventhough he may have lain there for a verylong time. I do not admit that is right. I donot admit for instance, that a great wronghas been done to the Red Indians ofAmerica or the black people of Australia. Ido not admit that a wrong has been doneto these people by the fact that astronger race, a higher-grade race hascome in and taken their place.”

• Will Muslims be taught of recentBritish history and its active support inthe creation of the illegal Israeli state andthe forced displacement of 5 millionPalestinians? And the British creation andsupport of nationalist movements in theArab world in order to divide and rule?And the instigation of assassinations toremove rulers that did not support theBritish agenda?

Given this, the mind just boggles whatwill be taught in terms of British values –given the social, political and moraldecline that is evident and the alarmingstatistics related to poverty, social disease,

crime, drug and alcohol abuse, humantrafficking, domestic violence, and so on.

But to give credit to truth, Theresa Maydid confirm that:

“Let me be clear: the ideology ofextremism and terrorism is the problem,Islam emphatically is not.... Above all, itwill tackle the threat from home-grownterrorism”.

We wait for the government to finallyannounce and admit that it is the home-grown terror that is debated, abhorred,and legislated against and within the fourwalls of Parliament. That which is theprinciple source of terrorism the worldsuffers from - secular extremism.

For Muslims, the agenda of Prevent hasbecome clearer as time has worn on. It isessential that Muslims equip themselveswith the cloak of Iman and to besteadfast upon the truth, engagingintellectually and politically, withoutdeviation. Likewise, as a community, theMuslims must adhere to Islam at all timesin its engagement within itself and thewider society and not allow it to becomea tool in the hands of those that seek toharm its adherents to Islam and becomethe voice for the return of Islam as theunifying political system in the Muslimworld.

"The believers, men and women, are"Awliya" (helpers, protectors) of oneanother; they enjoin the good and forbidthe evil…” [TMQ Al-Taubah 9:71]�

www.khilafah.eu Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 11

BURHAN HANIF

It is an uncomfortable position for governments as Muslims openlyquestion and seek debate on the legitimacy and application of secularvalues and challenge the brutal and hypocritical foreign policy thatwestern governments have adopted in the Muslim world.

Friday April 22nd marked the bloodiestday of the 5 week old uprising in Syria.Security forces indiscriminately shot andkilled 73 people in an attempt to quashany semblance of revolution and topplingof the Syrian regime. Indeed the signs ofunrest in Syria are testament to people’sbelief that they have the power to changethe status quo.

The Syrian uprising follows popularuprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya andother Muslim countries in the Arab world.From the suppression of politicalexpression through imprisonment to thelabelling of alternate political views as‘thought crimes’, the Muslims of the Arabworld have experienced decades ofpolicing and subjugation by tyrant rulers.Nevertheless, this has not deterred

Muslims from remaining politically activenor dampened their spirits of believing intheir aspirations of living under a justsystem of government in the future.Throughout history, the question of therole of women in political life has been asubject of much interest and contention.Needless to say that much demonizationof Islam has centred on the labelling ofIslam as being the cause of women’s lackof public and political life in the Muslimworld rather than the decadent Arabcultures of bygone years or the importedsystems of the east and west. History istestament to the multitude of face liftsArab countries have had – each systemand dictator promising to uplift womenfrom oppression. Yes – women in theArab world call for a removal of tyrantrulers, but are they craving for western

democracy instead? What role do Muslimwomen carry in achieving the desiredchange? To answer such questionsrequires a deeper study of the history andheritage of the Arab peoples and itsimpact in shaping political life andactivism.

EMERGENCE OF THE DEBATE ON THEROLE OF MUSLIM WOMEN IN POLITICSMany ideas exist on what is the correctrole for Muslim women in politics. In thebook ‘Women in Islam: A WesternExperience’ by Anne Sofie Roald, shewrites: “Political empowerment ofwomen can be looked at from variousperspectives. Secular Muslim feministsfocus on the top of the political ladderand thus promote female leadership,whereas Islamic women seek

Uprising in the Arab World & the

Political Role of Muslim Women

RUKSANA RAHMAN


empowerment on the lower rungs of theladder so that many women are politicallyactivated”. It seems two discourses existon this issue; firstly whether women canassume the role of head of state – whichis largely a feminist construction, andsecondly how it is that women should bepolitically activated. So why have suchdiscourses re-emerged in the Arab world?

THE POLITICAL INVASION AND ITSIMPACT ON POLITICAL ACTIVISM OFMUSLIM WOMENFrom the time of the Arab Revolt – thebiggest betrayal against the UthmaniKhilafah in 1918 onwards, North Africaand in particular Egypt and the Hijaz hasbeen a hotbed for the introduction oferroneous ideas on women. With thewest’s infatuation with ‘The Orient’culturally and militarily – InfluentialMuslim thinkers and writers fell into thetrap of philosophising Islam anddistorting understanding to suit thewestern palate. Many female figuresemerged at that time in the politicalarena – ready to demonstrate and speakout for the causes they believed in whichpropelled the call for reforming Islam.The feminists of that era such as HudaSha’rawih, Safiyah Zaghlul, Princess Nazli,Siza Nabrawi and the like, were politicallyactivated in the wrong sense. Suchwomen were the wives and daughters ofreformists with some receiving a westerneducation. They called for women’s rights,freedom to remove the hijab and absoluteequality. The motivation behind theactions of such women is the notion thatwestern liberalism was the way forward.Deluded by the idea that the grass isgreener on the other side, they failed tonotice that women in England werestruggling for their right to vote orinheritance when Islam had alreadygranted such rights 1400 years ago. Thereason why women in Egypt were beingdenied such rights was due to theabsence of the Islamic State, which couldimplement them. The greatest danger thatbefell the Muslims at that time is theiracceptance of foreign invasion whichlead to the carving up of Muslim landsand the imposition of kingships anddictatorships as political entities. Undersuch secular political systems; patriarchy,subjugation, oppression and thesuppression of political activism of

Muslim women for decades becamecommon practice. Such a political realityinspired Muslim women to be unified onone view – that oppression and tyrannyby the political system should not exist. Italso inspired some women to set uporganisations and charities whichprovided a small voice and a cause towork for under such brutal regimes,which numb any attempt to questiontheir authority.

MODELS OF POLITICAL ACTIVISMSociety in the Arab world has alwayswitnessed two branches of politicalactivism; the call from secular Muslimwomen and feminists on the one handand the call from practicing Muslimwomen on the other.

The American plan of democratisationwished to force a model of democracythrough man-made legislation to shapethe political landscape from Indonesia toMorocco. Prior to the Arab uprising of2011, the US attempted to ‘liberate’ thepeople of Iraq by dispelling Saddam andbring in a ‘representative’ government. Itmust be made clear that westerndemocracy is not the simple action ofvoting for the leader – but to legislate andimplement a secular man-made stateconstitution. The bastions of democracyalso tried to activate women politically bythe mere offering of votes which many inIraq and Afghanistan have boycotted andlabelled as rigged and the encouragementof women to be represented inparliament (e.g. The Loya Jirga inAfghanistan). According to ‘The WorldAssociation of Parliaments’ (IPU – anassociation consisting of 155 nationalparliaments around the world); at the endof 2010, women made up a fifth ofparliamentarians worldwide, up from16.3 percent in 2005. In 2010, 43chambers of parliaments (most beingNorthern European states) met the UNtarget of including at least 30 percent ofwomen MPs. 62 chambers remainedbelow the 10% mark and 10 chambersincluded no women at all. Arab statesremained at the bottom of the table, withan average of 11.7% in femalerepresentation in parliaments. Thisincrease from 4.3% in 1995 to 11.7% in2010 is due to the introduction of aquota system in Egypt and other North

African countries. Morocco achieved a10% female representation in parliamentby 2002. Saudi Arabia and Qatar have nowomen representation and Kuwait doesnot let women run for office or vote.What has changed politically from theinvolvement of women in democracy?The protests in all the Arab countries andparticularly in North Africa is testamentto the inability for female representationor democracy to solve the problems ofsociety. If further proof is required – weneed not look further than Afghanistan,Pakistan and Iraq where the people havespoken lowd and clear of what they thinkabout western interference and importedwestern systems like democracy with orwithout a face change. It is also evidentthat following a 100 year struggle to gainequality and rights by women in the


RUKSANA RAHMAN

west, western democracy (representativerule is Islamic, secular rule is not) is farfrom being a beacon of justice forwomen. With shocking statistics of rape,battery, sex crimes, prostitution andpornography subjecting women toimmorality and injustice – democracy haslost the argument of taking the moralhigh ground or be considered as apolitical solution.

The political activism from secular

feminists have thus focussed on thesuperficial, such as campaigning forwomen as heads of state and imams,more female representation in parliamentand the like. Those who do not conformto this way of thinking and call for analternative political system like theIslamic Caliphate are labelled ‘Islamist’.Therefore, the majority of Muslim womenin the Muslim world are clear that thecorrect Islamic political activism is not bycalling for ‘feminism’ nor ‘pro-democracy’(man-made laws). Suchactivism is a deviation from the Islamicpolitical actions of ensuring Islam ispresent in society and ruling. The call foraccountable government is not a pro-democracy call. The process of voting toelect a head of state is not exclusive todemocracy; rather the Islamic rulingsystem also has a process of electing andaccounting.

WHAT MUSLIM WOMEN WANT IN THEMUSLIM WORLD?Gallup 2005 Survey suggests that Muslimshave learnt a huge lesson from westernimposition in recent times such as theIraq and Afghanistan invasion. ‘70% ofMoroccan women, 71% of Lebanesewomen and 48% of Saudi women polleddid not think adopting Western valueswould help the Muslim world's politicaland economic progress. The mostfrequent response to the question, “Whatdo you admire least about the West?” wasthe general perception of moral decay,promiscuity and pornography thatpollsters called the “Hollywood image”

that is regarded as degrading to women.When asked what they resented mostabout their own societies, a majority ofMuslim women polled said that a lack ofunity among Muslim nations, violentextremism, and political and economiccorruption were their main concerns. Thehijab and burqa seen by some Westernersas tools of oppression were nevermentioned in the women's responses’(Helena Andrews; 2006). The Gallup pollalso revealed that Muslim women want

an Islamic system to govern their affairsand wanted an end to westerninterference.

Such opinions indicate that lessons havebeen learnt from recent occupation.Muslim women want a removal oftyrannical rule, western interference andthe right of self-determination – with themajority calling for an Islamicgovernment.

THE CORRECT ISLAMIC POLITICALACTIVISM FOR MUSLIM WOMENUnlike feminists, the solution is neitherlinked to female leadership nor toachieve more female representation inparliament. Such calls have producedlittle change and are a clear deviationfrom the commands of Allah (SWT):The notion that women can be heads ofstates has come about from feministsthrough the distortion of evidences.There is a clear prohibition in thefollowing hadith; “A people who appointa woman as a ruler will never succeed”[Al-Bukhari]. The prohibition ofappointing a woman to a position ofauthority is linked to ‘lack of success’(Qareenah), - that is, a lack of success inthe afterlife - which indicates that theprohibition is decisive. Therefore,appointing a woman as a ruler isforbidden (Haram). Furthermore, thenotion that female representation in aman-made democratic parliament isnecessary is against the principles of theIslamic ruling system:“The rule is for none but Allah (SWT)”

[TMQ 12:40]

“And whosoever does not rule by whatAllah has revealed such are thedisbelievers.” [TMQ Al Maidah, 44]

Thus, prior to the establishment of anIslamic State, Muslim women are requiredto engage in political actions as anobligation to her Rabb (Lord). Hence shewould enjoin the Ma’rouf (right) andforbid the Munkar (falsehood, evil),account the tyrant ruler, call for theimplementation of Islam, work to re-establish the Deen of Allah (SWT) andconcern herself with the affairs of theUmmah. The Muslimah would be vigilantof the problems the Ummah faces andaware of the solutions to herpredicament. She would only engage inthe Halal and reject the call tocompromise, partial solutions or adoptwestern inspired solutions.

Following the establishment of theIslamic State, her duty to account theruler, enjoin the Ma’rouf and forbid theMunkar will continue, but she can inaddition assume positions ofresponsibility within the state’s politicalstructure such as a judge, offering adviceon the Council of the Ummah and inelecting the Khaleefah. The prohibition ofwomen assuming a ruling position suchas a Khaleef, delegated assistant, Wali orMayor (Aml) does not equate to injusticeor inequality since the society is built oncooperation of the sexes rather than thebattle for sameness.

Securing the rights of Muslim womentherefore requires arduous and consistentpolitical actions that Islam has instructedwith a clear intention to please Allah(SWT). A conscious effort must be madeto uproot erroneous and foreignimported political systems and to replacethem with the Islamic Khilafah system.�


RUKSANA RAHMAN

‘70% of Moroccan women, 71% of Lebanese women and 48% of

Saudi women polled did not think adopting Western values would

help the Muslim world's political and economic progress.

This article is based on a morecomprehensive explanation of theIslamic ruling on Protests andDemonstrations which can be read atwww.icuture.org.uk

In the aftermath of popular uprisings inthe Arab world some ‘ulama (clerics)sponsored by the Saudi regime havegiven a most unfortunate regressivefatwa (religious edict) that protests anddemonstrations in that land are haram(prohibited). In this article, Allah willing,we want to scrutinise this fatwa.Muslims are commanded not to be likethe Ahl al-Kitab (The People of theBook) who took their priests and rabbisas Lords (instead of Allah), acceptingtheir judgments blindly withoutquestion.

The reasons given by governmentscholars and others range in gravity, fromthe serious charge of rebellion, to thedownright ludicrous - demonstrations

will hold up traffic! Indeed it isembarrassing to read the justificationsgiven by the ‘Ulama of the Saudigovernment’s ‘Council of SeniorScholars’ and those who follow them;thus legitimising the Saud regime, whichis a haven for the other illegitimatetyrants in the region - such as Mubarak,Ben Ali and now Ali Abdullah Saleh. TheSaudi fatwa is premised on one principalreason: that protests and demonstrationsconstitute rebellion against thelegitimate rulers of Saudi Arabia.

‘Protection of the community is of thegreatest principles of Islam. It is from thegreat issues that Allah commanded in HisHoly Book, and condemned whoeverabandoned it. Allah Almighty says: "Andhold fast, all together, by the rope whichAllah (stretches out for you), and be notdivided among yourselves...” (Al-‘Imran:103) This is the principle of protectionof the community, which the Prophetcommanded upon all citizens, common

and elites alike, as he (saw) said: "Allah'shand is with communion" (narrated byTirmidhi). He (saw) also said: "Whoeverheld back the hand from obedience, willmeet Allah on the Day of Resurrectionwithout any justification for himself; andwhoever died without the pledge ofallegiance on his neck, has died a deathof ignorance" (narrated by Muslim). He(saw) again said: "He who wanted toseparate the affairs of this nation whenthey are unified, you should kill himwith the sword, whosoever he is"(narrated by Muslim).’

The fatwa assumes that the Saudi regimerules by Islam and as such, they arelegitimate rulers. The reality of thematter is that the Saudi Regime is farfrom being a legitimate Islamic authority.

WHAT IS A LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY INSHARIA?A state becomes Islamic when its rulesand policies derive from the Islamic‘Aqidah (creed) i.e. when there basis isthe Qur’an and Sunnah; meaning thesovereignty lies with the Shari’ah. That iswhy obedience to the rulers is restrictedand not unqualified. Allah (swt) says:

“O you who believe! Obey Allah, ObeyHis Messenger and those in authorityfrom amongst you; and if you differ,then refer it to Allah and His Messenger,if you believe in Allah and the LastDay.” [Al-Nisa: 59]

www.khilafah.eu Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 15

Countering the SaudiAttempt to Silence theWord of Truth

KAMAL ABU ZAHRAH

The noble ayah (verse) begins with theimperative (command) form verb ati’u(‘obey’): the subject of obedience (i.e.those who obey) is in plural form,meaning ‘ALL those who believe inIslam’; and the object of obedience (i.e.the one who is obeyed) is Allah (swt).The verse then repeats the commandati’u (obey) and this time the object ofobedience is the Messenger (saw). Therepetition of the word ‘obey’ and theorder indicates the two basic referencepoints that Muslims have: the Qur’an andSunnah. Therefore anything incontravention of Qur’an and Sunnahmust be disobeyed, and anything fromthe Qur’an and Sunnah must be obeyed.This is the principle upon whichMuslims are told to live by and this isthe principle on which Muslims areinstructed to view their rulers. Here theword for rulers, or those in authority, isulul- amr (literal translation: ‘the peopleof Command’). It is not restricted to theKhalifah, but also includes the wali’s(governors), wazirs (ministers) and allthose who have authority, especiallysince the word has been used in theplural form (ulul-amr) and not thesingular waliyul-amr.

It is significant that the ayah does notrepeat the verb ati’u when it comes tothe Rulers, as it did in respect to Allahand His Messenger; this is an additional

indication alongside the clear verses andhadith that state that rulers must obeyAllah and His Messenger in their rulingand exercise of authority. For examplethe Messenger (saw) said: ‘There is noobedience (when this results) indisobedience of the Creator.’ [SahihBukhari] Here the mantuq (directlyapparent meaning) is an absoluteprohibition of following an order thatgoes against the order of Allah (swt) -whosoever makes that order. This hadithcame specifically in the context ofauthority and ruling. Its mafhum(implied meaning) indicates that just as

the person cannot obey a ruler whocommanded disobedience to Allah (swt);so in the same way, a ruler or amircannot order, enact laws or rule byanything that is in violation of whatAllah (swt) has ordered.

The verse also obliges the obedience tothe command of the Messenger (saw)and links that to the rulers. As long asthe rulers or those in authority obey theMessenger (saw) then there is theobedience to him, otherwise there is noobedience. That is why the Messenger ofAllah, may Allah bless him and grant himpeace, said in a hadith reported by AbuHurayrah: ‘Whoever obeys me hasobeyed Allah and whoever disobeys mehas disobeyed Allah. Whoever obeys theamir has obeyed me and whoeverdisobeys the amir has disobeyed me’”[Agreed upon]. As for the statement‘whoever obeys the amir has obeyed meand whoever disobeys the amir hasdisobeyed me’ in the above hadith or thefollowing one: “Anyone who dislikessomething from his amir should bepatient. Anyone who abandonsobedience to the amir for even a shorttime dies the death of the Jahiliyyah(ignorance)” [Agreed upon]:This doesnot mean absolute obedience to therulers. These ahadith are about notrebelling against the rulers due to theirmisappropriation of the people’s rights,but not about obeying the rulers in thematters which are a clear violation of

the Shari’ah. Rather, when the rulercommands a clear munkar, the Muslimmust disobey that command and cannotsay he was following orders.

The verse then concludes that if there isa dispute over a matter, between theMuslims and their rulers, then the finalarbiter must be Allah and His Messenger(saw). It states: “if you differ, then refer itto Allah and His Messenger, if you believein Allah and the Last Day.” The last wordsof the ayah enjoin on the believers theimportance of referring to Allah and HisMessenger in ruling, by drawing

attention to the fact that not to do so isa negation of iman; hence it says: ‘…ifyou believe in Allah and the Last Day.”

This is how the Sahabah (ra) understoodthis matter and nothing shows this moreclearly than the speech of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq when he assumed the post ofKhalifah: “Help me if I am in the right;set me right if I am in the wrong. Theweak among you shall be strong withme until Allah willing, his rights havebeen vindicated. The strong among youshall be weak with me until, if Allahwills, I have taken what is due from him.Obey me as long as I obey Allah and HisProphet; when I disobey Him and hisProphet, obey me not.”

The conclusion therefore is that a rulerbecomes legitimate only when he baseshis rule on the Kitab and Sunnah, i.e.sovereignty is for the Shari’ah, and it isfor this reason that obedience becomesobligatory.

However, when we look to the case ofthe Saudi regime, we find that the basisof its rule is not the Shari’ah, asindicated by its persistent and constantexplicit contravention of the Shari’ah;here are a few examples:• Permission of usury (riba) andbanks trading in usury, which iscategorically prohibited in Islam.

• Submission to man-made

...to claim that demonstrations against the Saudi rulers is prohibited, ismisplaced as the Saudi regime does not enjoy any legitimacy whatsoeverfrom the Shari’ah perspective.


KAMAL ABU ZAHRAH

international law as members of the UNand other international bodies, whosecharters and rules are not in accordancewith Islam.

The flagrant and persistent violation ofShari’ah by the Saudi regime, even afterhaving been accounted by the ‘ulamaand the da’wah carriers means that theabove constitute explicit kufr (kufrbuwah). Consequently, their rule is notlegitimate and they need to be removedby the people of power (nusrah) and ajust ruler appointed in their place.

So to claim that demonstrations againstthe Saudi rulers is prohibited, ismisplaced as the Saudi regime does notenjoy any legitimacy whatsoever fromthe Shari’ah perspective. Holding on tothe rope of Allah, and unity of theJama’ah arises only when Muslims gatherunder the leadership of a ruler who

rules by the book of Allah and Sunnah ofthe Messenger, not under the leadershipof those who betray the interests of theUmmah and are only interested in beingthe khadims (servants) of America.

EVIDENCES FOR PERMISSIBILITY OFDEMONSTRATIONS AND PROTESTSAs for the proofs (adillah) for thepermissibility of demonstration, theseare both general and specific:

A demonstration or protest is a publicdisplay of opinion. The general evidenceswhich allow people to meet and expressopinions would permit people todemonstrate their opinions as long asthe opinions expressed are permitted byIslam. As such protests anddemonstrations are merely a permissiblestyle, which takes its hukm (ruling)dependent on the reasons and aims ofthe demonstrations; thus these must beassessed before a hukm can be given, forhow can a style be labelled haram

without consideration of its aims andpurpose?

Another form of general evidences arethe ‘umumat (generality) andunrestricted (mutlaq) import of theahadith that enjoin Muslims to speak thehaqq, enjoin the good and forbid theevil. So for example the hadith:

‘The best struggle (jihad) is the word oftruth spoken to a tyrant ruler.’ (Al-Nasa'i).

This hadith encouraging politicalstruggle does not specify the manner inwhich the truth should be spoken to thetyrant ruler, which means any style thathas not been prohibited by another textis permitted. So whether by a letter,distribution of leaflets, publication of abook, article in a newspaper or speakingdirectly to the ruler, these are allpermissible means of fulfilling the

obligation.

The above hadith says ‘the beststruggle’: this fits a reality where theaccounting is done publicly, since that istruly a struggle, whereas it is easier toaccount privately. It is when the ruler isaccounted in front of everyone that he islikely to kill or imprison the personaccounting him.

It was the practice of the Sahabah toaccount the rulers in public. It isreported that a person told ‘Umar b.Khattab (ra) to “fear Allah” publicly, and‘Umar responded by saying: ‘There is nogoodness in you if you do not say it, andthere is no goodness in us if we do nothear it.’ (Manaqib amir al-muminin byIbn Jawzi. P.155)

As for the Salaf al-Salih, look at theexample of Hasan al-Basri: he waspresent in Basrah when al-Hajjaj, a tyrantWali, built his grand palace and called all

the people to witness it. Hasan knewthat this was a great opportunity toremind the people about the place ofwealth and status in this life. He said:“We looked at what the filthiest of filthbuilt, and we found that Fir’awn builtgreater than what he built and higherthan what he built, then Allah destroyedFir’awn and what he built. Hajjaj shouldknow that the inhabitants of the skyhate him and the people of the earthonly deceive him!” It was said to Hasan“Be careful, O Abu Sa’id!” Hasan replied“Allah has taken a covenant from thepeople of knowledge to explain it to thepeople and not to be silent!” In thisexample Hasan al-Basri openly exposedthe excesses of the ruler. (Suwar minhayat at-tabi’in, ‘Abdur Rahman Ra’fatBasha p.101-102)

Furthermore, it should not be said thatthe advice should be private orotherwise it is ghibah (backbiting). Thisis because the ahadith have come in anunrestricted form, and in fact theindications of the ahadith of accountingare that the accounting is to be done inpublic; and as for ghibah, there is noghibah for the one who does open fisq(transgression). Imam Nawawi in hisRiyad al-Salihin, under the chapter of‘Types of Ghibah which are Permissible’listed six types, which in his view areallowed as exceptions (to the normalprohibition of back-biting); of these,three are relevant:

a) Complaining (tazallum) to theruler or judge

b) Seeking help to change an evil(munkar)

c) Mentioning the one whoopenly commits a sin (fisq) orinnovation (bid’ah).

Indeed, under any of the above threecategories there would be a dispensationto backbite against the ruler’soppression, evil actions or open sins.Some like Hasan al-Basri did not consideraccounting rulers as ghibah in origin, asit is reported that he said: ‘There is nobackbiting with regard to the fasiq(sinner who openly professes his evil)."


KAMAL ABU ZAHRAH

...encouraging political struggle does not specify the manner in whichthe truth should be spoken to the tyrant ruler, which means any stylethat has not been prohibited by another text is permitted. So whetherby a letter, distribution of leaflets, publication of a book, article in anewspaper or speaking directly to the ruler, these are all permissiblemeans of fulfilling the obligation.

(al-Lalika’i, 1/140,p. 279).

As for the specific evidences that publicdemonstration of accounting ispersmissible, they are numerous; weshall here give two clear examples ofpublic display of opinion. It has beenreported by Al-Bukhari on the authorityof Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased withhim) that he said: "When the followingverses were revealed: "And warn yourtribe [O Muhammad (saw)] of nearkindred." [26:214] The Messenger ofAllah (saw) ascended Mount Al-Safa andstarted to call: "O Bani Fahr! O Bani'Adi!" Many people gathered, and thosewho could not sent somebody to reportto them. Abu Lahab was also present. TheProphet (saw) said: "You see: if I were totell you that there were some horsemenin the valley planning to raid you, wouldyou believe me?" They said: "Yes, wehave never experienced any lie fromyou." He said: "I am a Warner to youbefore a severe torment." Abu Lahabpromptly replied: "Perish you all the day!Have you summoned us for such athing?" Muslim has the followingversion reported on authority of AbuHurayrah (ra) — He said: "When thefollowing verses were revealed: "Andwarn your tribe [O Muhammad (saw)]of near kindred." [26:214] TheMessenger of Allah (saw) called all thepeople of Quraysh; so they gathered and

he gave them a general warning. Then hemade a particular reference to certaintribes, and said: "O Quraysh, rescueyourselves from the Fire; O people ofBani Ka'b, rescue yourselves from theFire; O Fatimah, daughter of Muhammad,rescue yourself from the Fire, for I haveno power to protect you from Allah inanything except that I would sustainrelationship with you."

Here Allah’s Messenger (may the peaceand blessings be upon him), afterreceiving the command to carry theda’wah to his tribesmen, went out ontop of Mount Safa and called out to theQuraysh to heed his warning. This was apublic display of opinion by the Prophet(saw), and what is permitted for theindividual is permitted for the group (aslong as there is no specific nass thatrestricts the action to the Messengeralone). So this is specific evidence forprotests and demonstrations.

The second example is the first publiccollective demonstration by Muslims,organised by ‘Umar b. Al-Khattab, forwhich he was praised by the Messenger(saw), as reported in ‘The Sealed Nectar’:“With respect to the Muslims in Makkah,‘Umar’s (ra) conversion had a differenttremendous impact. Mujahid, on theauthority of Ibn al-‘Abbas (ra), relatedthat he had asked ‘Umar b. Al-Khattab

why he had been given the epithet of Al-Faruq (He who distinguishes truth fromfalsehood); he replied: After I hadembraced Islam, I asked the Prophet(saw): 'Aren't we on the right path, hereand in the Hereafter?' The Prophet (saw)answered: 'Of course you are! I swear byAllah in Whose Hand my soul is; that youare right in this world and in thehereafter.' I therefore asked the Prophet,'Why had we then to conductclandestine activism. I swear by Allah,who has sent you with the Truth; thatwe will leave our concealment andproclaim our noble cause publicly.' Wethen went out in two groups, Hamzahleading one and I the other. We headedfor the Mosque in broad daylight. Whenthe polytheists of Quraysh saw us, theirfaces went pale, and they got incrediblydepressed and resentful. On that veryoccasion, the Prophet attached to methe epithet of Al-Faruq." (Al-Rahiq al-Makhtum p113 1st ed. English trans.)

Therefore, demonstrations and proteststo account the rulers and expose theirbetrayal of the ummah’s interest arepermissible by the general and specificevidences regarding this subject, as longas no other rules of the Shari’ah areviolated, such as destruction of public orprivate property, non Islamic slogans orfree-mixing.

CONCLUSIONThe political authority that rightlybelongs to this Ummah has been stolen,usurped and abused by the tyrant rulers.Only the Islamic political struggle willbring real change for this Ummah andwe are obliged to reclaim that authorityby accounting them and working to re-establish the Khilafah that WILL rule bywhat Allah has revealed. Let us heed thewords of Muhammad al-Mustafa (saw):

"Nay, by Allah, you either enjoin goodand forbid evil and catch hold of thehand of the oppressor and persuade himto act justly and stick to the truth, or,Allah will involve the hearts of some ofyou with the hearts of others and willcurse you as He had cursed them".[Abu Dawud and At-Tirmidhi]. �


KAMAL ABU ZAHRAH

The term ‘sick man of Europe’ was coinedto describe the declining situation of theOttoman’s by Tsar Nicholas I of Russia in1853. The Ottoman territories were beingswallowed by rival world powers and itsdebts were out of control due to a seriesof disastrous wars. Nicholas I of Russiadescribed the Ottomans as ‘a sick man – avery sick man, a man who has fallen intoa state of decrepitude, or a sick man …gravely ill.’ The economic situation,political prowess and independence wereall seen as indicators which the Ottomanswere losing over a period of 100 years.

In April 2011, the credit ratings agencyStandard and Poor’s, whose job is toindependently rate the ability of nationsto repay their debts, announced that itplans to downgrade America’s creditrating as it was dubious of the USgovernment's ability to meet its debtobligations.

UNSUSTAINABLE DEBTIf one considers the US debt situation, orif we carried out a book keepingexercise, the US doesn’t just deserve adowngrade, but far more than one. TheUS generates over $14 trillion annually,however the national debt – this ismoney the central and federalgovernments owe to the US public andthe world through the bonds they haveissued – stands at $14.3 trillion. Interestpayments on this debt was $414 billion in2010 alone. Those who are expecting tobe repaid by the US one day includegovernments such as China, companiesand banks. The US citizenry have a hugeappetite for imports and credit cards andas a result consumer debt stands at $2.4trillion. The desire by Americans to owntheir own homes has resulted inmortgage debts of $13.2 trillion. Thedebts of US companies amounts to $20.8

trillion. This means the US is indebted tothe tune of $50.7 trillion – more than thecombined economies of Japan, China,Britain, Germany, France, Brazil, Canadaand Italy twice over.

The US trade deficit has also continued toballoon, the amount the US importscompared to the amount it exports – inessence the money the US owes to theworld stands at $500 billion (per annum).Western values of consumerism andgreed have exacerbated the trade deficit;additionally American economic policiesover the last few decades have weakenedAmerica’s industrialised base, hencerestricting America’s ability to producegoods and services cheaply domestically.This has resulted in America relying onimports and on China. Similarly the USgovernment deficit is also growing. Byway of an analogy a government deficitcan be compared to the overdraft whilethe debt is the mortgage. The deficit isthe excess of government expenditureover government income in any givenyear. Government debt is theaccumulation of all past deficits.

SUPERPOWERHow did the US get into such a position?As the world’s superpower the US hasalways been spending more then itpossesses. The US has afforded itself thisright - something it devoutly opposes forothers. It has been able to get away withthis as it is the world’s superpower. Thismeans all those countries, companies and


Is America thenew ‘Sick Man?’

ADNAN KHAN

banks that have funded US debt expect tobe repaid by a prudent US when the debtrepayments become due. There is alsoone other crucial reason why the US getsaway with such levels of debt and that isdue to the dollar.

After World War two European nationsworked on reconstruction due to thehavoc caused by the war, the USpositioned itself to make the dollar thereserve currency of the world. Whilstinitially the US promised to peg itscurrency to Gold and convert anyredemptions of its dollar to Gold bullion(at $35 per ounce), by 1971 it abandonedthis. This meant all international financialmarkets and commodity markets werepriced in dollars – yet the US currency,

the dollar was not backed by gold, andtherefore had no realistic control over itsvolume in circulation. Today this meansthe US can actually print more currencyto meet its debt obligations. It is able todo this because it has imposed itscurrency on the rest of the world. Sofundamentally America’s political poweris what allows such out of controlspending polices to continue.

From a bookkeeping perspective Americais bankrupt, spending is out of controland shows no sign of being fixed anytimesoon and its debts continue to balloon.The US will manipulate the currencypolicy of the entire global system for itsown benefit, both congress and theupper house as well as the FederalReserve have no problems with this. Butthis can only continue so long as the USremains the world’s superpower. Allindications are that this is waning.

END OF THE AMERICA CENTURYThe US lied about weapons of massdestruction in its invasion of Iraq and aquick victory gave way to a longoccupation, which has seen corruptionand incompetence at the highest level.The cost to the US has been massive andcontinues. Guantanamo bay and Abu

Ghraib have undermined America’s chiefexport for over a quarter of a century –human rights. Similarly the US military isviewed as overstretched and America’sposition is seen as untenable. Both warsin Afghanistan and Iraq have cost the USastronomically large sums and whilst therhetoric is about draw downs in bothnations the US is merely changing theway it maintains its interests in thesecountries from military occupations tothe use of agent rulers and bribes.

The US has now found itself in aprecarious situation where foreignnations are actually funding it. The USbudget is not sufficient for the nationsconsumption patterns, as a result the USresorts to selling Bonds to the world

which it will repay over a period of 10 –30 years in the hope the US economywill by the time the Bonds mature havegenerated sufficient wealth to repaythem. 32% of US debt is held by foreignentities, whilst 17% of this is held byChina and Japan. China has accumulatedover $2 trillion in dollar reserves due tothis. Described as China’s “nuclear option”China could trigger a dollar crash if itdecided the dollar was not worth holdingand switched to Euros.

The US is also facing numerous politicalchallenges in regions of the world whichonly a decade ago it completelydominated. In the Middle East apart fromneeding the help of regional surrogatesthe region is gradually shifting from beinga uni-polar region in which the USenjoyed uncontested hegemony to amulti-polar region. The Arab Spring hasalso shown that the Muslims of theregion want change, which complicatesthe architecture the US has long reliedon. The US is also facing morecompetition from China and Russia overaccess to Middle East oil, and increasinglycompeting with India and Japan as wellas the European Union for the lion’sshare of the regions black gold. Similarlywhilst the US economy is the world’s

largest economy, its share of the globaleconomy is shrinking as nations such asChina, India, Brazil, Japan, Mexico, Turkeyand Russia continue their rapid growth.

American symbols are also being rapidlyreplaced. Today the tallest building is inDubai, not America, the world’s richestperson is no longer an American but aMexican. The world’s largest tradedcompany is in China and the world’slargest plane was constructed by Russiaand Ukraine. London is the world’s largestfinancial centre and the worlds largestSovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) is in theUAE, not New York. Beijing has theworld’s largest mall, whilst the US onlyhas one mall in the world’s top ten. Theworld’s biggest movie industry is nolonger Hollywood, but is now Bollywoodin India. Similarly the world’s largest ferriswheel is in Singapore, whilst the world’slargest Casino is in Macao. Only 10 yearsago the US was at the top of all of theselists.

Both the British Empire and the SovietUnion were engulfed by unsustainabledebt which led to the collapse of theirsuperpower status. The US is in a muchworse position then both powers everwere. This situation is not sustainable.Despite quantitative easing (2 phases)and various stimulus packages (forexample car purchase incentive scheme,bank and homeowner bailouts) the UShas failed to come out of recessionconvincingly, putting doubt on where thegrowth will come from to repay US debtin the years to come. These factorsalongside a falling dollar places the US ina situation where it is now reliant uponforeign nations to fund it. These areremarkable times as the world iswitnessing the direct impact of Americanimperial hubris and overstretch. We maybe witnessing the beginning of the end ofAmerica as the world’s superpower.America has all the hall marks of the newsick man.�


ADNAN KHAN

32% of US debt is held by foreign entities, whilst 17% ofthis is held by China and Japan. China has accumulatedover $2 trillion in dollar reserves due to this.


Throughout history water has beenconsidered as one of the most importantcommodities for mankind; it has fulfilledthe various needs of mankind. Water isrequired in almost every process forexample, it is used for oil refining, forliquid extraction in hydrometallurgicalprocesses, for cooling, for scrubbing inthe iron and the steel industry and fordifferent operations in food processingfacilities, etc. It is also vital for all knownforms of life.

A majority of the Muslim world does not

have access to clean drinking water or acontinuous supply of water. As a result,water related illnesses have occurredwhich have resulted in death andwidespread diseases. For example inPakistan it is estimated each year, thatmore than three million becomeinfected with waterborne diseases ofwhich 1.2 million die. Of these 250,000are children under five years of age, whosuccumb to diarrhoea and vomiting. InBangladesh sanitation faces its own setof challenges, with only 39% of thepopulation estimated to have access to

adequate sanitation facilities.

In Taiz (Yemen), the frequency of publicpiped water delivery is only once every40 days. People have to rely on morecostly water that is provided by privatewells to supply water tankers. Thequality of this water is questionable asthese tankers have often been used forother purposes without appropriatecleaning. An intermittent water supplywithin Pakistani urban areas is common;the Asian Development Bank (ADB)indicates continuity rates of 1 to 10

Water distributionunder the Khilafah

ABU SALAHUDEEN

hours (Karachi), 11 to 15 hours(Rawalpindi) and 16 to 23 hours(Lahore) per day.

Hence a lack of water sanitation withinthe poor parts of the Muslim world hasresulted in illness and disease. The rootcause of a lack of water sanitationwithin the Muslim world is due to thecorrupt governments failing to invest inprojects to improve sanitation orupgrading the water infrastructure. Thecurrent infrastructure used in the citiesof Pakistan to deliver clean water toresidents is old and requires upgrading.Water contamination i.e. dirty watermixing with clean water is a majorproblem across the Muslim world. Untilwater sanitation is improved, we willcontinue to see the current waterrelated problems throughout much ofthe Muslim world.

Under the Khilafah, the state will ensurethat all its citizens have access to cleanwater and a continuous supply of wateras this is something enshrined withinIslam. Muhammad (saw) said:

"The son of Adam (Muslim & non-muslim) only has a right to three things,a house to live in, clothes to cover hisnakedness, and dry bread and water."(TIRMIDHI)

Water will not be privatised as water isconsidered a public property withinIslam. However there will be a servicecharge which the citizens of the statewill pay as there is a cost in processingand distributing water. The Khilafah willhave the following policies in placewhich will ensure that the higheststandard of clean water supply is givento all its citizens:

CLEAN WATERProviding clean and pure water to thecitizens of the Khilafah is an obligationof the Khaleefah. The Khilafah will havechecks and balances in place to ensurethat the highest quality of water isprovided to its citizens. One method thatthe state will adopt to ensure that thesupply of water meets high standardswill be to take water quality samplesfrom the water network and check themon a regular basis. This process does not

currently exist within the majority of theMuslim countries.

Continuous supply of waterThe state will provide water to itscitizens continuously withoutinterruption. The occasional plannedinterruptions are an exception; forexample, if the state was to carry outwork on the infrastructure and aninterruption was required, then in thesecircumstances the state will notifycitizens that will be affected by theplanned interruption and give analternative supply of water for theduration of the planned interruption.Other rare circumstances are unplannedinterruptions, for example if a pipefeeding 1000 citizens was to burst, thenthis pipe will require an isolation (for arepair) which will result in a loss ofwater. An SLA (Service Level Agreement)will be in place which will ensure thatrepairs on damaged pipes are completedwithin a given time.

LEAKAGE AND WASTAGEIslam encourages conserving water,hence under the Khilafah, there will be a

22 :: Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011

ABU SALAHUDEEN

www.khilafah.eu

big incentive to save water and minimisethe leakage and the wastage of water.The state will have educational programsand targets in place that will encouragethe citiziens of the state to not wastewater.

ACCOUNTABILITYOne of the key factors’ that hascontributed to the distribution of poorquality of water within the Muslimworld is a lack of accountability.Governing bodies that have been set upto oversee water quality are not being

accounted for poor water quality. Forexample in Pakistan the Ministry ofHealth is expected to set water qualitystandards and monitor drinking waterquality in the country. A lack ofcoordination and accountability betweenthe ministry and the government hasresulted in the ministry of health of notbeing fully in charge of waterdistribution within Pakistan.Under the Khilafah accountability willbe linked to providing clean and acontinuous supply of water to thecitizens of the state; i.e. if the state failsto provide clean water to its citizens,there will be accountability measures inplace that will ensure that governmentofficials are held accountable.

INFRASTRUCTUREThe Khilafah will invest in projects thatwill lead to the enhancement of thewater infrastructure. The various projectswill include the upgrading thedistribution mains (these mains are usedto distribute water to citizens within acity) and the installation of trunk mains(these are large mains that are used todistribute water from city to city). Therewill be a ring main installed within someof the key cities of the Khilafah. Thepurpose of the ring main is to distributewater to a part of the city, should thewater supply be affected. The ring mainwill take water from one part of the city

and then supply water to the affectedpart of the city.

Water will be brought into the cities ofthe Islamic state via different sourcessuch as bore holes (water from theground), rivers, reservoirs, seas’, andrecycled water. Each city will havemultiple pumping stations, sewage andclean water treatment plants. The cleanwater treatment plants will take waterfrom the various sources that have beenmentioned. The objective of the cleanwater treatment plants and pumping

stations will be to treat water anddistribute water into the city. There willbe laws in place which will ensure thatthe citizens of the state are receiving agood flow of water and at the rightpressure through their taps. Within someparts of the Muslim world, waterpressure is so low that it does not reachthe high points of a city.

Currently some of the largestdesalination water plants exist withinthe Muslim world i.e. UAE and SaudiArabia; a desalination water plant turnssalt water into drinkable water. As UAEand Saudi Arabia are considered driedlands, these countries take water fromthe sea and convert sea water intodrinkable water by the usage ofdesalination plants. The Khilafah will alsotake advantage of desalination plants asthe usage of these plants will ensure thatthe water demands of any city withinthe Muslim world are met. Amongst themany advantages existent within theMuslim world, is that the majority of theMuslim world has a coast and the wateroff the coast can be used to meet thewater requirements of the Muslim worldthrough the usage of desalination plants.

CONCLUSIONThe Muslim world has the wealth tobuild an advanced water infrastructure,however the major obstacle that has

stopped the Muslim world fromadvancing are the governments whohave stolen the wealth of the Muslimworld; if the wealth was used wisely theMuslim world could have achievedmuch. At the peak of the Khilafah, thestate had designed and developedinfrastructure which was used todistribute water into major cities. Forexample, the famous Mulism enginner Al-Jazari developed the earliest watersupply system to be driven by gears andhydropower, this was built in the 13thcentury and this water system suppliedwater to Mosques and hospitals withinDamascus. Al Jazari lived during thereign of the Khilafah, and the Khilafahencouraged progress through theutilisation of the best technology of thetime. The future Khilafah will in thesame way encourage progress, hence thewater engineers of the state will designand develop the best waterinfrastructure in the world, and thiswater network system will provide cleanand pure water to all the citizens of thestate. �

Khilafah Magazine :: July 2011 :: 23

ABU SALAHUDEEN

www.khilafah.eu

Amongst the many advantages existent within the Muslim world,is that the majority of the Muslim world has a coast and the wateroff the coast can be used to meet the water requirements of theMuslim world through the usage of desalination plants.

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

June/July 2011 - Hizb ut-Tahrir held Khilafah conferences in Tunisia,Indonesia, Malaysia, UK, Australia and other places

Khilafah magazine-july-2011

News & Politics

training teams

uk labour

uk haspakistan

uk guardianregimes

beuk training saudi

american information

human rights concerns

peterthe uk channel