Many Iraqis Believe Washington Aid Islamic State

The general in charge of U.S. special operations forces in Iraq for the past six months has come out to speak about wide spread believe among Iraqi troops who believe America supports the Islamic State. The top generals fear this potentially leaving U.S. forces vulnerable to reprisal attacks from their nominal allies in the fight against the militants.

Gen. Kurt Crytzer believes this is a communication issue, convinced that Washington’s information campaign in the Middle East is so inadequate that many, “Our adversaries are constantly one step ahead of us in the IO realm,” said Army Brig. Gen. Kurt Crytzer, using the acronym for information operations, while talking to reporters in Florida.  This view is shared among American policy makers; on Tuesday, Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the head of U.S. Special Operations Command was also commenting on the release of multimedia material by US forces.

Foreign policy writes that “the nation that invented the Internet and which is home to Hollywood and Madison Avenue still has trouble competing with the message promulgated by terror groups whose worldview hearkens back to the 7th century but use a sophisticated online and social media strategy to raise money and recruit new fighters.”[1]

The US policy makers commit yet again the fatal error of mixing the remedies they have or can obtain with the solution for the problem and the media as usually carries the dominant narrative. This is not an information or rather misinformation problem, its how the policies of the US, the West and regional allies has impacted the region and its people. The information campaign on the contrary has had a negative impact on the image of the West in the middle in so far as justifying, promoting and reiterating the official line while it has been proven time and again that the western policies are detrimental to the region. As such sources associated with the west has lost their credibility while alternative media such as Aljazeera, RT, Iranian media and IS campaigns have gained audience either as primary or alternative source of information.

The Islamic State could not have emerged without support from western powers and their regional allies. They funded and facilitated the travel of jihadis from 80 countries into Syria and then trained and armed them. In so long as the Jihadists were fighting the Syrian government Western government turned a blind eye on the crimes they were committing against Syrians and all the signs of rising tide of fanatic Jahidism among the Syrian resistance. The idea of overthrowing Assad was primary and an imminent reality after the fate of Gaddafi and no neoconservative and liberal interventionist would have thought it would take this long.  Ecstatic by the prospect the liberals and neocons ignored all the key lessons learned in the last twenty years:

1.    War is unpredictable: this becomes more obvious if one studies the dynamics of conflict in Afghanistan; where the mighty US army failed to sway the tide in its favour against a ragtag band of peasants they labelled Taliban.

2.   People suffer in war: what if this war get uglier and become longer, are you willing to take that risk in order to achieve your strategic objective of ousting Assad from power? This question is left out but there should be a way to get this question into the policy thinking.

3.   States become weaker: as primary caretaker of the community and population a weakened state exposes the population to dangers and decline in living standards but also give rise to violence and tensions in society.

4.   Fanatic Islamism is not your friend: following the pattern established by al-Qaida (allies to Afghan Mujahidin) and the Taliban policy makers should have seen this coming.

We are at a point in history with human tragedy of millions suffering before our eyes can nudge us a bit and the primacy and pursuit of national interest as defined by western leaders is above all. Even if Gen. Kurt Crytzer was right and this was a media war the west has nothing but hypocrisy.

---

[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/20/top-u-s-general-many-iraqis-believe-washington-aiding-islamic-state

Religious zest and the plight of women

Today as we stand looking at significant scientific, economic and technological advances that had been made in the last fifty years, you can’t help wondering how come the situation of women has improved so little or in parts of the world got worst. The reality is that millions of women are suffering and being oppressed under religious laws and Islamic cultures in many different parts of the world. The past fifty years have been some of the darkest in women’s lives. With the anti-secularist backlash, the rise of political Islam, and efforts over the past two decades to impose religion on the people, thousands have been executed - decapitated or stoned to death - and medieval laws to suppress women have been revived.

Islam is the ideology in power in most Muslim countries. In all of these, society has suffered serious setbacks in civil rights in general, and women’s rights in particular. Yet many voices seek to justify Islam: western academics, the mainstream western media, so-called moderate Muslims and some Eastern intellectuals all try to justify the operation and rationalize brutality. They tell us that what we are seeing is not the real Islam; they divide Islam into good and bad, moderate and fundamentalist. They tell us it’s their culture and that’s how they live. The British imams going on media to keep reminding us that all Muslims are not terrorists.  Outrageous and racist but because they are Imams or religious leaders their remarks are tolerable. They fail to address in any constructive way cultural, social, political and economic factors that has bedeviled Muslims across the world. Here are a few cultural issues that the Muslim leaders need to address.

1.     Equality of rights for women

Women are deemed to be inferior to men. Women are men’s belongings and women can have no authority over men. That a woman counts as only half a man in legal and financial matters; this is enforced widely and those Muslims who justify this rely on Islamic script. “And call into witness two men; or if two be not men, then one man and two women” (Koran, The Cow. Verse 282) and “ God charges you concerning your children: to the male the like of the portion of two female” (Koran, Women, verse 11)

2.     Sexual oppression of Women

Women earn God’s grace by obeying their husbands. The message is clear: men dominate, women obey. From a religious perspective, women are there merely for the sexual enjoyment of men and for purposes of reproduction. In Islam female sexuality is acknowledged, but limits and confines women to their sexual and reproductive roles. Most muslim has taken this too far by considering women as a potential danger by distracting men from their duties and corrupting the community. Orthodox interpretation place restriction on women’s sexuality, whilst men are given the right to marry up to four wives and the right to temporary marriage as many times as they wish. Free male–female sexual relations are considered a sin in Islam. This is justified by literal interpretation of Koranic verses that define which sexual relations are permitted under Islam, and the punishment for any transgression (called zena) outside these limits. Zena is punishable by flogging, imprisonment and stoning to death.

3.     Legal practice and women

Despite modernisation and reform, family law and the penal code have remained largely untouched, on the contrary in the last three decades fundamentalists have inserted their interpretation. Polygamy, men’s unconditional right to divorce their wives, the law regarding sex outside of marriage, men’s decision making over their wives’ employment and travel, and a woman’s lack of right to custody of her children are among them. Hijab is the definitive form of clothing for women. According to widely practice Islamic law, the legal age for a girl to wed is nine – an obvious case of sexual abuse and rape.

Conclusion

The state is a prerequisite for women’s liberation from religious oppression. A strong social movement and international support is needed with long-term commitment to build modern and stable states across the Muslim world.

Is it all Afghans fault?

Western online media coverage on the NATO exit is coloured with remarks on the western experience of Afghans and the benefits Afghans could have reaped from western presence.

I believe such remarks are counter productive bordering racism. The failure to stabilise Afghanistan is not a fault of Afghans but a letdown by institutions, if anything the Afghans are the victims; Afghans are resilient and honourable people, kind hearted, welcoming, and brave warriors. They are not the childlike brutes stereotyped in western media.  

NATO did not go to Afghanistan to improve Afghan lives but part of a US led alliance for getting revenge. It was very much a debt the allies paid to the US for the Marshall aid, democracy and saving them from communism.

Here are a few things NATO could have done to help Afghanistan:

1.     Train and equip a national army.

2.     Economic development

3.     Integrate Afghanistan into international political and economic system.

4.     Foster national leadership.

Here is what happened instead

1.     Arm and fund militia with history of human rights abuse and atrocities to fight the Taliban. Waging war against a part of the population under the labels of terrorist and Taliban by arming an extremist wing of another part of population under the guise of ‘state’. This labelling fails to capture the political and economic subjectivities and diversities of actors. The boundaries between these groups may be more about the subjective act of naming than any real practical separation between them. The US wanted blood and the allies tagged along by radicalising a section of Afghan people to settle old scores against another. This revenge policy led to antagonising the Afghan people and have blow in coalition face while costing tens of thousands of Afghan lives.

2.     The core strategy of international community was aid which only delivers assistance to very few and leaves out the majority to fend for themselves. Treating the symptom of poverty while ignoring the dysfunction of the state, which should be tasked to look after the welfare of the people. 

3.     No significant trade treaty, no long term strategic partnership, relationship at its low of all time with neighbours and antagonised the very leadership the west appointed to rule over Afghan people.

4.     Warlords, drug lords and criminals were bundled together by giving them a share in ruling over Afghan people.

Whether this war was a good thing or a bad thing was the decision of Westerns and as such their leaders should be held accountable.

The Reason a woman is brutally murdered by a mob in Kabul

An angry mob lynched a woman in Kabul on Thursday, beating her to death and then setting her body on fire.  The incident happened in the centre of Kabul and under the watch of Afghan police. At the time she was accused of burning the Quran but it is unclear whether she had actually burned it or not. A government statement from ministry of Haj and religious affairs dismissed the account and added she was an attendant at the shrine, according to Tolo News. It has also become apparent that the victim later identified as Farkhunda suffered mental illness, “Farkhunda had a mental malady, and we have been seeing many mullahs and doctors to seek a cure for her mental illness,” her mother told reporters.The last couple of days I have been thinking why such a barbaric and anti-Islamic travesty happens yet a large number, but not all, Afghans support it. The New york times in a story reflects on Afghans Reaction reporting approval. Reuters Report of support from cleric who in a sermon broadcast by loudspeaker told devotees that the crowd had a right to defend their Muslim beliefs at all costs.

Before we lose perspective and infer bile stereotypes of Afghans and slash any hope for this nation where a mob of angry men bludgeon to death an innocent woman, lets remind ourselves of murder and death in the state of nature. No other word depicts the human condition than the visionary masterwork of Flemish artist Pieter Bruegel, The Triumph of Death, it is not of course a work of realism, but Breugel certainly did not have to rely entirely on his imagination to depict a scene of stomach wrenching death and destruction. In a land ruled by an army of skeletons, a king lies dying, his treasure of no avail, while a dog gnaws on a nearby corpse. In the background two hanged men on gibbets, four men broken on wheels, a man about to be beheaded. Armies clash, houses burn, men and women young and old soldier and civilians are all driven pell-mell into a narrow tunnel. No one is spared. The artist himself died in his early forties. The portray.

Much of human history is some version of agony depicted by Bruegel in the state of nature. Islam as cultural framework lifts the state of nature by creating an individual value system conducive to peaceful coexistence and as subjects of a legitimate Islamic state that is tasked to be a vessel of collective decision-making and enforcement. The laws of Islamic State of Afghanistan is based on Islamic values and principles. The basis for a judgment in Islamic law is the jurist’s ability to carefully apply knowledge to theory and practice. In order to be qualified to interpret the sources of law, a jurist should master many branches of knowledge such as logic, Quran, Hadith, history and general knowledge as well as specialised areas like commerce or international relations. This approach adopted by Islamic law to reach judgement through Fiqh, Ijma, Qiyas, Urf and Istisahan is to ensure due processes and streamline justice. Mob justice undermines due process of Islamic justice and is a manifestation of Jaliyat, it undermines Islamic foundations of Afghan society. It also shows obsession and compulsion with icons and symbols of religion that is only valued for its physical material. From the onset Islam opposed Icons and Statues in Kaba that were worshiped by the pagans. Islam is world-affirming by construing the created world as fundamentally a good place and placing responsibility on individual action. For such a system of belief conduct and laws are fundamental than icons and symbols.

I believe for such barbarism is a failure of state policy and structures. The state should create a monopoly on the means of violence. In practice, this criterion has often been reduced; first to a simple monopoly on violence and then to little more than control of capital city. However, it is the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly on violence as perceived by the citizens of the state that is the key to using this monopoly as a criterion of statehood. If the polity rejects the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly on violence, then that monopoly is inherently unstable. Hence the state’s monopoly on the means of violence must be balanced by the presence or creation of credible institutions that provide checks and balances on the use of force; that the state itself must be constituted through, and accountable under, the rule of law. The rule of law is undermined by the very same leaders and clerics who are high-level functionaries of the state. The powerful men and the current patronage system of state power distribution are impediments to rule of law and the real reason for the troubles that ravage Afghanistan. The violence of gangs and mobs are unnerving but they are nothing more than symptoms of an ailing system.