By Adamu Admu
14 February 2014
With the return of God's government, so does the return of the primacy of divine values that have been at the receiving end since the Renaissance. After Salman Rushdie's escapade, even godless Hollywood has had to think twice and hard over a sequel to The Last Temptation of Christ; because, after Khomeini [qss], no one dares insult divine sanctities--and go scot free.
And supporters of Iran are proud that the Islamic Republic has taken up the fight for the defence of divine personalities and divine values; and so long as it keeps to this, there is nothing the entirety of the West, nay, the world, can do about Iran except learn to live with it. For the moment, that happens to be the truth: and the problem with the truth is that it remains the truth even if it is disbelieved by everyone in the world--and, in this case, it is that nobody can destroy the Islamic Republic or reverse the Islamic Revolution as has been proved many times in the past.
On June 28, 1981, for example, the entire operational leadership of the Islamic revolution was decapitated. Ayatollah Muhammad Hussein Beheshti and more than 70 ministers, parliamentarians and other senior party and government operatives were wiped out in a massive bomb blast detonated by a member of the American-supported Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organisation. Beheshti, whom the Imam [qss] called an Ummah, was, after the Imam [qss] the leading architect of the revolution, the writer of the new Islamic constitution; the founder, leader and secretary-general of the ruling Islamic Republican Party, the Chief Justice of the Islamic Republic and chairman of the Assembly of Experts. Eight weeks later President Muhammad Ali Rajaie and the Prime Minister Muhammad Jawad Bahonar were killed in another blast.
It was a government beheaded, and it was a blow no government in the world could have taken and survived. But given the status of the Imam [qss], the unprecedented devotion of Iranian Muslims to a near-perfect leader and courageous presence on the scene ensured that the Islamic Republic didn't even flinch from a blow that was, no doubt, great. An Islamic revolution, the confidence and the revolutionary patience it bestows are a divine bounty that only God can give. It is not a trophy that terrorism or conservatism can claim; it is not a description that petrodollars can buy; nor is it a qualification that America can confer on its bankrupt friends in the Gulf or withhold from its enemies. It is something that only faith and sacrifice can grant--and it alone in turn can grant constancy and staying power.
But in contrast to the stability and invincibility of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Egyptian Arab Spring, for instance, still at the level of organisation that has not swamped structure to become a revolutionary movement, was not able to withstand the arrest of its leaders. In the absence of the sagacity, knowing competence and comprehensive leadership provided by the Imam [qss], the Arab Spring dissipated into a misdirected winter of discontent that foundered, staggered and then fell--and provided the foundation for the installation of a worse dictatorship than the one it replaced.
Where on earth can the world get an Imam like Khomeini [qss], this indomitable hoister of this unfurled banner of Islam and indefatigable smasher of modern, global idols? They misunderstood him deliberately then, and now they are set to misunderstand his legacy even more deliberately. Thus, while negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, lasted, Iran's Supreme Leader issued a fatwa that stated the true Islamic position--that Islam does not allow Muslims the liberty to use nuclear weapons against anyone.
Because of the extent of its devastation and collateral damage to the world and whatever is in it, a Muslim state that believes in God and the Last Day cannot use nuclear weapons even in self defence. That perhaps should have reassured a panic-stricken world over the hype created by the US over Iran's programme, but the fatwa went largely unnoticed; and because it was issued not to reassure the West but only to state the Islamic position, Iran never sought to make its text part of the negotiations with IAEA or show it as proof of its good intentions.
Despite the anonymity of its sacrifice, the pain of the great price it has had to pay, the splendidness of its isolation and aloneness in prosecuting the struggle against the international nuclear club that wishes to shut the door on all others, Iran never faltered even when Saudi Arabia offered to sponsor and foot the bill for an all-expenses-paid American invasion of the Islamic Republic. The dust raised over this beclouded the real issues Iran was fighting for, which are: the right of poor nations to pursuit after knowledge as a source of power and independence; the futility of threat as a weapon of diplomacy against a true Muslim power as shown by Iran's calling off of the world's bluff; and Western double standards and contradiction over Israel's nuclear capability.
While within the past 35 years, Iran has shown its peaceful intentions, Israel, whose nuclear programme the West supports, has not. Though it is the most powerful nation in the Middle East, Iran has not attacked a single country since 1979 even though it has itself been invaded by one--Iraq, and provoked beyond the limits of tolerance by another--the Afghanistan of the Taliban, and serially enraged by Saudi Arabia over several issues. On the other hand, Israel has within the same period hit out at Osirak in Iraq, has attacked Syria three times, blasted the Refa Pass in Egypt's Sinai, invaded Gaza countless times, launched and carried through two full-scale invasions of Lebanon, and threatened to invade Iran more than a dozen times. Yet even despite this, Arab states don't support Iran's programme, even though they have been silent about Israel's 300 nuclear bombs.
But their failure to support Iran was just not caused by the usual sectarian divide: it was more a reflection of the strange and unfortunate ranking of Muslim priorities. For instance, while innocent Muslim blood was being shed in the Bosnian cities of Dubrovnik, Banja Luka and Srebrenica and in Kosovo in the early 1990's, ulama from 21 Muslim countries gathered and as the blood flowed, they were busy in Mecca trying to find solutions to the following grave problems: In Islamic rites, is it lawful to sacrifice a buffalo? If one or two of the seven rocks thrown at Satan in Mina miss their target, will there be any ransom? Is a crow [hankaka] considered halal or haram? What is the acceptable size of a Muslim beard? Is it permitted to pray behind a beardless Imam? In the midst of such trivia, it all too easily gets forgotten that Iran was the only Muslim country that landed troops in Bosnia. None of the others could or even wished to do so despite the fact that the entirety of Bosnia was Sunni.
The Islamic Revolution has taught the world the liberating power of Islam. Within three decades, and in spite of economic, military and diplomatic sanctions, the revolution succeeded in catapulting Iran from a position of total dependence on the Americans to one of total independence from all international patrons. It has gone from food importation to self-sufficiency; from the status of an arms importer to conventional arms manufacturer and from a market for advanced American armaments that needed the presence of 40,000 American advisers to that of the developer of sophisticated missile technology handled 100% by Iranians.
Its brave stand on Palestine and the whole question of peace in the Middle East process is quite at variance the policy of surrender adopted by some of the Arab states led by Saudi Arabia, which on account of its fear of the West and the threat of the withdrawal of Western protection for its monarchy, is only too eager to recognise a state populated by European émigrés and founded on an existing Muslim state whose inhabitants have been dispossessed, dispersed and deprived of their land without the right of return.
Today, for instance, on arrival in Palestine, a Polish Jew--Caucasian to the core and without any historical or ancestral ties to the Holy Land--becomes a fully fledged citizen while the former Palestinian inhabitant is either a besieged refugee in Gaza or stateless in Tunis; and these people call the negotiations they engage in from time to time a peace process. Without the stand of the Iranian-backed Hamas and Hizbullah, the series of capitulations known as the Arab summits, the so-called Fahd Fez Plan, the agreements at Oslo and Wye will have long ago become the new status quo--and a veritable shame hung on the necks of cowardly Muslim states.
In very unfortunate contrast, as Iran gets ready to celebrate 35 years of true independence, Saudi Arabia gets ready to coordinate its strategic national security interest with that of Israel to keep Islam forever at bay--and the Muslim World must thank the Islamic revolution for exposing pretenders to rule by Islam and forcing their actions to tell the truth about intentions, irrespective of what they claim.
And at a point, the Saudis begged the Americans to invade Iran for them. So, if that's what they want, why do they have to invite the Americans? Clearly, it means they can't do it themselves; because, in invading Iran, the Saudi National Guardsmen will have to contend with the Iranian Customs Service--and they may not know what to do about such an insurmountable barrier.
URL of Part 1: http://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-sectarianism/adamu-adamu/nigeria--islam-and-revolution-(i)/d/35790