From the BBC
Jordan is hosting a meeting of Iraq’s neighbours on Thursday to rally support for Iraqi elections on 30 January. It wants all the nations present to issue a "clear message" to Iraqis that they should vote in the poll, Jordanian Foreign Minister Hani Mulki said.
However, Iran’s foreign minister is boycotting the meeting in protest at comments by Jordan’s King Abdullah. The king accused Tehran of meddling in Iraq and trying to create a Shia sphere of influence in the region.
I’m of the belief that Iraqis should participate in the elections. Boycotting the polls won’t do the Iraqis any good, as it will only extend the current state of anarchy! To the Iraqis out there, I say, make your voice heard: Cast your ballots.
A kafir? Where did I call you or anyone else, political system or mashed potatoes, a kafir. I never said the current political system is kafir.
As for the evidence on Maan, its out there.
This Guardian article scratches the surface:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0%2C2763%2C838125%2C00.html
According to Anthony Shadid, Iraq is one of many reasons of dissent – and the consequential siege – in Maan:
http://www.s-t.com/daily/02-03/02-06-03/a02wn018.htm
and…
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20021112164037522
http://www.merip.org/mero/mero120302.html hinting that dissent over Iraq was one of the reasons the government used pre-emptive force.
http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=14511
http://www.lebanonwire.com/0211/02112301TGR.asp
= )
Actually Jameed, if you look at my fist comment in response to metalordie’s first comment, I was shocked that someone would suggest not supporting Iraqi’s to vote in the election. but, i followed the debate, and i just found metalordie’s arguments to be more persuasive.
I am not defensive of “all Arab governments” but comparing Saddam’s gassing of civilians, mass graves and improvised torture methods to what happens or happened in Ma’an or elsewhere or to a 100 “temporary laws” is simply unrealistic. And I agree with the above comment by “Hubby”: know what you are throwing randomly into your discussion.
As much as your first part of the response is, in my opinion, yet again irrelevant, I have to give you credit for finally offering your preference to voting in the upcoming Iraqi elections. I too would rather see the elections postponed; in fact that’s what I would have said have we had this discussion a few months ago, but I do not see this as a viable option with less than 3 weeks to go, especially that postponing it will weaken Bush’s position who insisted on several occasions that the elections will be held on time-something the American administration neither wants nor will allow to happen.
As for the choice of the lesser of two evils, I will keep my response short because I have no intention of turning this into a religious debate. The examples I gave were only to show that this principle is indeed found in Islam and not an imported “western conception.” But I find it ironic that you implicitly accuse me of takfir yet you deem the current system “kafir”. Well, how about you work to change it? The easiest thing right now would to participate in the upcoming elections!
And Linda,…Oh Linda! It seems that you have taken sides in this discussion long before I joined it. But let me suggest a more politically correct way of inquiring about someone’s nationality, namely, “Where are you from?” because asking “what are you?” can simply be answered “oh, I am Homo sapiens, how about you?”
Um, where did you unearth this nugget:
“I refer you to Maan. Every time a prominent Maan resident spoke out against the Clinton admin’s bombing of Iraq or the impending 2003 war, the entire city would be under siege.”
I think you’ll find that none, either pro or anti-government, have ever suggested any of the unrest in Maan stemmed from speaking out against the action of Clinton or his admin. I think when delivering a history lesson you should refrain from being flip, else you risk cheapening your position.
And the winner is…METALORDIE!
Yes, the past is now (analogies of the US occupation to the British one of 1920, analogies comparing the US use of the Patriot Act to the Nazis’ Kristallnacht and Anschluss, analogies comparing the current Arab political climate to the 12th century rule of Crusader kingdoms by proxy…the list is bountiful), but let’s hold on a sec here and examine just what you mean by Saddam’s atrocities. Is it the butchering of political dissidents you refer to?
Since you seem to be Jordanian, let’s look at the house made of glass before hurling rocks at others. If you aren’t, well consider this a freebie history lesson.
I would ask you to refer to the tradition of sacking entire towns and pummeling them to rubble, all with the blessings of Ol Uncle Georgie. I refer you to Maan. Every time a prominent Maan resident spoke out against the Clinton admin’s bombing of Iraq or the impending 2003 war, the entire city would be under siege.
Syria was just as effective in the 1980s:
The fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood seized Hama as the first step towards its goal of a national uprising against the secular Baathist regime. The Syrian President demanded their surrender. His army shelled the city, and special forces went in to kill or capture the militants. The Syrians employed the same strategy that the US is using now. Its tanks and artillery waited outside the city; they fired on militants and civilians alike. Its elite units, like the American Marines surrounding Falluja today, braced themselves for a bloody battle.
The US condemned Syria for the assault that is believed to have cost 10,000 civilian lives. The Syrian army destroyed the historic centre of Hama, and it rounded up Muslim rebels for imprisonment or execution. Syria’s actions against Hama came to form part of the American case that Syria was a terrorist state. Partly because of Hama, Syria is on a list of countries in the Middle East whose regimes the US wants to change (Charles Glass in Sulaymaniyah, The Independent, November 9, 2004).
There are currently 100 “temporary laws” which severely limit freedom of expression in Jordan, as I am sure in most Arab countries. Former MP Toujan Faisal was convicted and imprisoned in May 2002 for publishing online a letter critical of a temporary law increasing the cost of car insurance that personally benefited the family of Prime Minister Ali Abu Ragheb.
When a youth arrested by crack police units in Maan died in custody of sudden “kidney failure”, his townfolk demonstrated. In typical democratic fashion, Maan was surrounded by special forces, army units, helicopter gunships, armoured vehicles and tanks. That’s the price of protest and dissent in Jordan.
According to Amnesty, more than 1,700 people were arrested during 2000 for political reasons. Many were held in prolonged incommunicado detention by the General Intelligence Department (GID). Some were later released without charge and others brought to trial.
In fact, torture is so superbly applied in Jordan that the CIA is now using it as a base of operations to garner information from detainees.
According to Rowan Scarborough in his book Rumsfeld’s war, “US interrogators are known to threaten some detainees with shipping them off to Jordan if they don’t co-operate. Like other Middle Eastern countries, Jordan uses physical means to coerce confessions and vital intelligence information.”
But Jordan is not alone in this, and therefore must not be singled out. Every Arab government, from Bahrain to Morocco, flagrantly and persistently violate international agreements, human rights laws and wholeheartedly use various forms of torture against political and criminal elements.
That Iraq is singled out, however, is testament to the power of the media. If you want to talk about Saddam’s atrocities you have to talk about those of all other non-democratic Arab regimes, especially so when Saddam’s human rights record is used (having failed and exhausted all other justifications) as a central argument in invading the country.
As for choosing the lesser of two evils, it is still a concept foreign to the teachings of the Quran and to be used in severely limiting cases.
The Quran talks of the suraat al mustaqeem. The straight path, not the wobbly or lets-divert-a-teensy-weensy path.
Evil is evil. The examples of masturbation and urination in the wonderful link you provided are simply silly and infantile when questioning the benefits of an entire nation.
For example, the issue of abortion would be applicable in the lesser of two evils concept. All schools of Muslim law accept that abortion is permitted if continuing the pregnancy would put the mother’s life in real danger. This is the only provision accepted for abortion after 120 days of the pregnancy.
It says something that you find moral equivalency between the Iraqi situation and masturbation.
The fatwas you mentioned are misplaced. They confuse the concept of communal well-being, which the Quran regards as central to human life. There is a concept in Islam called Istihsan, which means “to look for the common good”. This is leagues away from the lesser of two evils.
Looking for the common good in Iraq’s election case would be to postpone the elections until a national reconciliation conference – bringing all parties and ethnicities together to hash out their difference – were to be held.
I would also ask you to refer to the economic relevance of Sharia maxims.
According to Al-Qaida Al-Fiqiyah, “Unlawful things are to be prevented irrespective of benefit”. The war was unlawful. It produced an unlawful occupation – the CPA, which appointed the unlawful IGC, which diluted itself into the current unlawful interim government, which is itself overseeing the way the elections are held.
This maxim is explained by Hassanuzzaman as follows: Trading in unlawful items and earning with unlawful ways might provide employment to a large number of persons and bring substantial revenues to the government. Nonetheless the unlawful items in trading must be eliminated since the removal of corruption has priority over acquisition of benefits – economic, social or otherwise.
Hassanuzzaman further explains the Sharia maxim “A wrong is not avoided by another of the same kind” by applying it to the responsibilities of government: It is not lawful for any government to rob a person or a group in order to provide benefit to some other person or a group. Thus it may not provide employment to some by denying it to others. Likewise it may not irrigate some farms by drying up similar other farms.
In the Jurisprudence of Assimilation, Asif Khan says “The principle of: ‘outweighing the best of two good actions, and rejecting the lesser of the two evils”, for the one who adopts this principle, applies to the Muslim who has no other option. An example for that is when one had to save a woman from death while her ‘awrah had become exposed. If a man who finds her in this situation and he is compelled to help her, then he should do so even if he has to look at her ‘awrah. As for that which can be avoided, it is not allowed to use such principles. Sh. Abdullah Bayya, stated, “I feel it is important that people are concerned with political candidates in this country. If we support the candidates who are known to have positive attitudes towards the Muslims and who are supportive of Muslim causes and even those who are just better people than the opposing candidates, in the usooli knowledge, this would be considered taking the lesser of two evils.”
Participating in kufr systems is something, which can be avoided. As for the one who defines the best of two good actions and two evil, it is the Shariah and not the mind. Since the Muslims gave their human minds the right to define and outweigh, which they are not able to do, due to the disparity in minds and views, they elected Tony Blair and rejected the Conservatives on the basis of this principle. What was the result? Did they prevent the worst of the two evils or did they bring it about?”
As for saying I clearly don’t know anything about Islam, it proves that you are entirely judgemental, something I have not been with you. But that is a classic Arab flaw, which originates in takfir.
Were Saddam’s policies of dictatorial rule negligible? Certainly not. Were they abhorrent? Definitely. Did they warrant the invasion and wholesale destruction of the Arab world’s most industrialised societies? No. And that’s the crux, eh?
Lastly, I leave you with words of wisdom from the Quran:
“Repel evil by that which is best. We are best Aware of that which they allege.” Surat Al-Mu’minoun (23:96)
Metalordie,
Thanks for informing me that Iraq is a predominantly Muslim country. I am surprised you mentioned that because clearly you don’t know much about Islam. The concept of “lesser of two evils” is a solid principle in Fiqh. Numerous past and modern-day scholars have agreed on it and used to issue fatwas justifying, for example, abortion if the mother’s well-being is at risk, or even masturbation if committing adultery was the alternative. The religious ruling in that case would be “The duty was left for an excuse and the evil was done for the sake of preponderant interest, or for the sake of necessity, or for averting a worse evil”.
For the sake of brevity, I will refer you to the below link to serve you as a starting point on the subject and to provide you with examples from Islamic doctrine about the choice of the lesser of two evils.
The Case of ‘Choosing the lesser of two evils’
But again, you are missing the point. I did not suggest we forget about the crimes against humanity committed by the outcast Iraqi regime or the “coalition” forces. The point is: the troops are on ground now and military operations are underway every hour; arguing about the justifications of war is futile.
And again you did not offer an alternative solution, or answer my question about your role in protesting Saddam’s atrocities or this war.
Oh, and thanks for making me smile at “the past is now.”
Iraq is a predominantly Islamic country. There is no such thing as lesser of two evils in Islam. There is only justice.
The lesser of two evils is a western conception of escapism and idealizing the status quo.
You can’t simply wipe away crimes against humanity and international law by saying everything is in the past. If that’s the case, why do we still hear about the holocaust, have the story of anne frank stuffed down our throats; why is germany building a memorial? Why are so many US senators so hung up about how arabs deal with the holocaust?
Why should we forget about how the Iraq crime came about and year after year bring up the holocaust, 9-11, pearl harbor, normandy, on and on?
Those who do not learn from history are cursed to repeat it.
No, the past is not the past. The past is now. You cannot run away from it and the Iraqis will not let go of it either.
Metalordie,
I appreciate your enthusiasm and concern for your country. However, your attack on Wendy is strange. You blame her as a tax-paying American (which she may and may not be) of befriending Feith, Rumsfeld and their cahoots and of not standing up against “her” government. Well, hundreds of thousands voiced their opinions but just like it was impossible for Iraqis to achieve anything but a death sentence if they protested against Saddam, the anti-war efforts were in vain. But out of curiosity and without implying anything, what did you do to express your opinion on Saddam or the war? Let me say that you are telling the obvious for your audience here; we all know the Dubya’s false reasons for the war and we are most familiar with the history preceding it. But thanks for the well-versed commentary and the WWII trivia. Now let us all go back to the original subject which is the upcoming elections. The damage is done now, debating over the causes or reasons of it is futile.
The election system is imperfect and a near-accurate list of voters is not available. But does that preclude the Iraqis from participating in it? Maybe, if there is an alternative. But since many great thinkers of Iraq were and still are busy composing eloquent pompous and at times irrelevant replies on people’s blogs, no such alternative was posed (except for probably bombing the hell out of each other until the last few survivors form their government-which is not immune from a bloody coup d’etat in a matter of weeks).
Sometimes people have to choose the lesser of all evils; many did, though unsuccessfully, in the last US elections. Iraqis should grab on to this opportunity as the lesser of two evils they have at this point in time: continuous turmoil or elections with even a slim chance of change.
Am not letting this go…
Reports say many things are have improved in Iraq. So what is wrong with accepting the new status quo? US officials are very proud
to say they have established some schools in Iraq. But were there no schools in Iraq before the occupation? Iraq was honoured by UNESCO in
1981 for being the first developing country to eliminate illiteracy.
In 1991 US-led forces bombed Iraq for 42 days. The level of destruction suffered by the infrastructure was three times the destruction done in 2003.
Yet everything was back to normal in just months. Why are Iraqis still suffering from shortage of electricity and pure drinking water after
18 months of occupation? — Khair al-Din Hasib
” Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
— Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials