Khilafah Magazine July 2003 by kaskaa kaakas

Khilafah magazine

Jumada al-U’la - Jumada al-Thani 1424 - July 2003

Contents

Cover Issue 7 Volume 16

EDITORIAL

THE MATRIX

REFERENCE

HOLLYWOOD ' RELOADS ' DISBELIEF IN ALLAH

6 18 THE ATTACK ON THE VEIL

NEWS

UZBEKISTAN

8 22 AMERICA INITIATES REGIME

THE WEST ' S

MURDEROUS ALLY AGAINST

CHANGE IN IRAN

ISLAM

24 11

BBC DEMONISES ISLAM

AN INTERVIEW WITH THE WIVES OF THE EGYPT

BUT FAILS TO BRING AN INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE

TREATIES I N ISLAM

MUSLIMS

A N D THE OFFICE DILEMMAS

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

Khilafah magazine

Editorial

Published by Khilafah Publications Suite 298, 56 Gloucester Road, London, SW7 4UB www.1924.org · magazine@1924.org

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatahu,

or nearly three quarters of a century the Muslims of Uzbekistan lived under the oppression of the God-less Communism; banned from worshipping Allah; forbidden from celebrating their faith; with their mosques turned into pig pens and alcohol store houses in malice. And yet all the fascism, tyranny and repression of the Soviet Union was unable to purge Islam from their hearts and minds for even with the darkness that engulfed their lives, the light of Islam glowed within them, waiting for the day that it would once again illuminate their land.

On Aug. 31, 1991 Uzbekistan's Muslims thought that day had arrived as the country declared its independence from the USSR. Today twelve years on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fascism, tyranny and repression still exists under the regime of President Karimov - the West's murderous ally against Islam and the enemy of the Muslims. In an attempt to expunge the word Khilafah and the desire to live under Islam from the hearts and minds of the Muslims of Uzbekistan President Karimov waged a brutal war on all Muslims that did not subscribe to his secular version of Islam. As a result tens of thousands of Uzbek Muslims have been unlawfully arrested, thousands have been tortured dozens have been killed in extra-judicial executions. Uzbek Muslim women have been threatened with gang rape during interrogation. Elderly women in their 70s have been stripped naked and exposed to rapists and murderers in an attempt to make their sons confess to fictitious terrorism charges. Muslims in prison report that they have been subjected to continuous and cruel battery, repeated anal rape and the insertion of metal bars in the private parts, imprisonment in basement cells in 4

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

conditions intolerable for any human being and the injecting of HIV infected blood for adhering to their prayers and refusing to seek forgiveness from President Karimov. And yet despite all the torture, all the persecution and intimidation, the unparalleled brutality and murder, the resolve of Uzbekistan's Muslims remains unbroken and more and more are carrying the Da'wah undoubtedly inspired by the words of Allah's Messenger Muhammad (saw) when he said:

"The best Jihad is the word of truth spoken before a tyrant ruler." Today the Muslims of Uzbekistan are the 'unsung heroes' to whom we owe a great gratitude, for they are the labourers of liberation, men who bleed to cleanse the earth of oppression. These men and others like them in the Muslim Ummah are an inspiration for all. Their stories of sacrifice and resolve for Islam could have easily been told fourteen hundred years ago amongst those of the Sahabah of Allah's Messenger (saw) and they would not have been out of place, but they are men and women of our time, our generation and this is the gift that they give us; their example today. O Land of Uzbekistan indeed Allah (swt) has blessed you with a progeny rich in courage as you are in soil. Men and women inspired by your legacy as the most devout of land to Islam in central Asia, who are moved by your history and the great scholars you have given this Ummah like Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Nasafi and Zamakhshari. O Champions of Uzbekistan may Allah (swt) reward you for your devotion and sacrifices. Know that today you are not alone in your struggle for we are with you and Muslims all over are with you. Today we are your hand that Karimov cannot severe, we are your tongue that he cannot silence and we are your body that he cannot torture. Muslim all over have began a campaign against the despot murderer Karimov the fruits of which we hope that you will taste soon Insha'Allah.

"And who is better in speech than one who calls to Allah, does good deeds and says that 'I am of those who bow down in submission'? [TMQ Al-Fussilat: 33] Waleed Gubara

Editor Dr Imran Waheed Deputy Editor Asif Dawood Editorial Board Asif Khan Ahmad Jassat Jalaluddin Patel Abdul Hamid Jassat Sajjad Khan

Sisters Editorial Advisors Dr Nazreen Nawaz Ruksana Rahman Sameena Asghar News Editor Dr Samiul Muquit Production and Publishing Mokbul Hussain Kosser Mohammed

Khilafah Magazine is a monthly magazine published in London with a wide distribution across the Muslim and non-Muslim world. The magazine is dedicated to articulating the case for Islam as an ideology that deals with all human problems, whether individual or societal. Islam must be understood ideologically and has a defined political and ruling system – the Khilafah System. We maintain that the 'Clash of Civilisations' is not only inevitable but imperative. As the Capitalist ideology dominates the world today, the only challenge to it must come from Islam. We write to inform, inspire and create a movement for true intellectual revival.

No Copyrights Since Islam rejects copyrights and patents you are free to reproduce articles contained within this publication. It is our kind request that when doing so you cite the author and source of the article.

Translation of the Qur’an It should be perfectly clear that the Qur’an is only authentic in its original language, Arabic. Since perfect translation of the Qur’an is impossible, the term ‘Translation of the Meaning of the Qur’an (TMQ) has been used, as the result is only a crude meaning of the Arabic text.

Subscription details Subscription charges: £20 per annum including postage UK €40 per annum including postage Europe $60 per annum including postage USA To subscribe to Khilafah magazine please refer to: Internet Site: www.1924.org email: magazine@1924.org or write to:

Khilafah Magazine, Suite 298, 56 Gloucester Road, London, SW7 4UB

Letters 26th June 2003 Mr. Richard Wilkins Commercial Director and Secretary Oxus Gold

27th June 2003 Corporate Communications Manager British American Tobacco Re: BAT & Uzbekistan

Re: Oxus Gold & Uzbekistan Dear Sir/Madam, Dear Mr. Wilkins, I write further to a telephone conversation with Ms. Katie Campbell earlier today. I write on behalf of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, an Islamic political party. As I discussed with your colleague, we, alongside the Muslim community in Britain, have launched an international awareness campaign that will throw the spotlight on Uzbekistan, its tyrannical rulers and its Western allies. As your company's main focus is the exploration, development and mining of precious materials in Central Asia, notably Uzbekistan, we would like an opportunity to discuss with you the concerns of Muslims in Britain about your continued investment in a country that routinely uses torture as a means of interrogation against its citizens. Tens of thousands of Uzbek Muslims have been unlawfully arrested, thousands have been tortured and dozens have been killed in extra-judicial executions. Uzbek Muslim women have been threatened with group rape during interrogation. Muslims in prison report that they have been subjected to continuous and cruel battery, repeated rape and the insertion of metal bars in the private parts, incarceration in basement cells in conditions intolerable for any human being and the injecting of HIV infected blood for adhering to their Islamic prayer rituals and refusing to seek clemency from President Karimov. Although Ms. Campbell explained that you are a corporate entity and had no relationship with the Karimov regime, she also mentioned that the company would not want to do or say anything that could potentially 'upset' the Uzbek regime. Does this mean that you are willing to dispense with all ethical values and turn a blind eye to the repression of Uzbek Muslims by the Uzbek regime, that has been widely documented by human rights organisations, thinktanks and NGOs? Your wesbite description that, "Uzbekistan is a modern, secular country, politically stable, with a democratically elected government." not surprisingly fails to mention the unlawful arrests, torture and extra-judicial executions of Uzbek Muslims. While ordinary Uzbek families survive on an average monthly wage of $10 and scurry around in search of their daily bread, Western corporate entities prop up the tyrannical regime who live lives of luxury. In the light of these very serious concerns, we would welcome an opportunity to meet with you, or one of your colleagues, at the earliest opportunity. Failing that, we will be left with no other option but to begin a relentless global media campaign that will expose your company's links to the barbaric Uzbek regime. In undertaking this campaign we will utilise all lawful means, including, but by no means limited to, the right of peaceful protest at your head office. Thanking you in advance of your reply. Yours sincerely, Dr Imran Waheed Representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

I write on behalf of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, an Islamic political party. We, alongside the Muslim community in Britain, have launched an international awareness campaign that will throw the spotlight on Uzbekistan, its tyrannical rulers and its Western allies. As your company has significant economic interests in Uzbekistan we would like an opportunity to discuss with you the concerns of Muslims in Britain about your continued investment in a country that routinely uses torture as a means of interrogation against its citizens. We note that Uzbek Prime Minister Utkir Sultanov has said: "British American Tobacco is a model foreign investor which makes a substantial contribution to the economic development of the Republic of Uzbekistan." We also note that the BHHRG found evidence in 2002 of BAT's collusion with local Uzbek tobacco barons who failed to pay their workers at all. You will undoubtedly be aware that tens of thousands of Uzbek Muslims have been unlawfully arrested, thousands have been tortured and dozens have been killed in extra-judicial executions. Uzbek Muslim women have been threatened with group rape during interrogation. Muslims in prison report that they have been subjected to continuous and cruel battery, repeated rape and the insertion of metal bars in the private parts, incarceration in basement cells in conditions intolerable for any human being and the injecting of HIV infected blood for adhering to their Islamic prayer rituals and refusing to seek clemency from President Karimov. Muslims in Britain are concerned that Western corporate entities are willing to dispense with all ethical values and turn a blind eye to the repression of Uzbek Muslims by the Uzbek regime, that has been widely documented by human rights organisations, thinktanks and NGOs. BHHRG representatives who visited Navoyi Kolkhoz [a tobacco collective farm] met kolkhoz workers who said they were unable to afford proper food and who subsisted on livestock feed. Workers complained of various illnesses ranging from the light-headedness and fatigue of malnutrition to hepatitis and leukaemia. Many houses not only had no heat, electricity or running water, but also no doors or windows, and the roofs had fallen in on several of them, leaving gaping holes that no one could afford to repair and forcing huge numbers of people to pile together in a single sheltered area where there was a single gas line provided occasional heat in periods of below-zero temperatures. Is it not the case that while ordinary Uzbek families survive on an average monthly wage of $10 and scurry around in search of their daily bread, the directors and shareholders of BAT line their pockets with riches and prop up the tyrannical regime who live lives of luxury? In the light of these very serious concerns, we would welcome an opportunity to meet with you, or one of your colleagues, at the earliest opportunity. Failing that, we will be left with no other option but to begin a relentless global media campaign that will expose your company's links to the barbaric Uzbek regime. In undertaking this campaign we will utilise all lawful means, including, but by no means limited to, the right of peaceful protest at your head office. Thanking you in advance of your reply. Yours faithfully, Dr Imran Waheed Representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

News DODGY DOSSIER OR DODGY FOREIGN POLICY?

perpetual and eternal and those interests it is our duty to follow." It comes as little surprise then that when Blair's cabinet announced almost a century and a half later that it intended to pursue an ethical foreign policy, few were taken in. Lord Carrington quickly dismissed it saying, "He [Blair] will run into quite a lot of difficulty about exports and retaliation. It's much better to do these things without a great fanfare." This latest scandal provides an insight at how the West's foreign policy is sold to the public by deceit, lies and deception, guided only by pragmatic interests. And no one should be surprised at the news that the architects behind this latest dossier have finally been exposed as fabricating the truth. Shiraz Maher

There has been debate recently surrounding the credibility of the British dossier published in the run up to the war on Iraq. In a vain attempt to drum up support for the conflict, Whitehall had brought forward this supposed dossier of damning evidence against the Iraqi dictator. Its findings were clear - that Iraq posed a real and immediate threat not only to her neighbours but also to the West. However, reports have slowly emerged illustrating just what a sham the whole dossier has been. Much of it was plagiarised from a PhD student's thesis whilst other parts had been grossly exaggerated or fabricated. Whilst a Commons committee now investigates wild allegations such as Saddam's ability to deploy WMD in just 45 minutes, the government has now admitted that the current fiasco is an embarrassment. Nevertheless, the hysteria surrounding the dossier should not be viewed in isolation. It is merely the product of an intellectually bankrupt foreign policy. Even a cursory examination reveals that the British foreign policy is riddled with sinister duplicity. Hence, whilst warring against Saddam in the name of freedom and liberty, the British continue to enjoy warm ties with tyrannical despots such as Karimov of Uzbekistan. In addition, her sale of VX nerve gases, anthrax and other biological weapons to such regimes has been extensively documented. The job of any foreign secretary here is to further British interests. This position was best described by Lord Palmerston (1848) who said, "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

HOMOSEXUALITY A "GIFT FROM GOD" Yet again one sees the Church hitting the headlines and once more the topic is centred on sex or sexuality. On this occasion it's not about priests having their way with choir boys but the controversy has emerged over the appointment as Bishop of Reading of a priest who has confessed to being in a long term homosexual relationship. This he himself had described as a "gift from God", yet despite being in a relationship for 27 years he now claims to be celibate! This incident has once more caused huge division in the Church of England with staunch arguments being presented from both sides, both against and in support of Dr John, the gay priest. However one cannot help but feel that, as the debate intensifies the fundamental point has been missed. This being that the Church is a secular institution and therefore has no choice but to compromise and yield to the whims and desires of its followers. So it is inevitable that the church will have to in time accept homosexuality in the name of modernism and progress - thus keeping in line with public opinion and saving it from becoming extinct. Indeed a wider debate on homosexuality has once again surfaced as the notorious Section 28 - the law banning promotion of homosexuality in schools - is to be repealed. The law has already been scrapped in Scotland but remains on the agenda in England and Wales. The Government aims to overturn the legislation; a move that it

feels will be easier as it has passed revised sex education guidelines for schools, through the House of Lords. The adoption of secularism has led to this situation where the church has rejected some of its core beliefs and immorality continues to spread in society. It is this same concept of secularism that is being sold to the Muslims. One should be aware that its adoption will lead to the compromising of Islam and the same problems faced by the West. Majid Ismail

NEW IRAQI ARMY - AMERICA'S SECURITY FORCE The American administration in Iraq has announced plans to rebuild the Iraqi Army. It had formally disbanded the previous Iraqi Army, leaving hundreds of thousands of soldiers without jobs or pay. This has led to many violent demonstrations, not only because the livelihoods of Iraq's soldiers were at stake, but because the Muslims of Iraq reject the notion that a belligerent occupying power, such as the US, can dictate their security apparatus for them.

Americans. No doubt it will be used to seek and destroy anyone who rejects the non-Islamic and pro-western, proxy regime that the Americans wish to impose upon the Muslims of Iraq. This is the natural result of the socalled liberation of Iraq, and the introduction of the democratic process. Aside from the US bending all the rules in its favour, democracy is a system of Kufr. Hence it naturally favours those who despise the Islamic system, and it clearly works against the interests of Islam. Only the Islamic system, the Khilafah, can safeguard the Islamic interests and defend the Muslims from the aggression of the western nations. This is because, just like all Muslims, the Khilafah has the Islamic creed as its basis for existence. Tanveer Ashraf

BANGLADESH GOVERNMENT WELCOMES WAR CRIMINAL POWELL

The American plans currently detail a force of only 40,000 soldiers, which is a fraction of the Iraqi fighting force before occupation. Such a force clearly poses no threat to Iraq's neighbours, hence cannot be deemed capable of defending Iraq's interests. Clearly America will be the force guarding Iraq's territorial and oil interests, as it moves the mass of its forces from neighbouring Saudi Arabia. The Iraqi Army is therefore effectively neutered, not capable of harming the American interests. No doubt, its function will mirror that of many other military forces in the Muslim world, which have had their function reversed from defending their citizens from aggressors, to fighting the people on behalf of the aggressors. For example, the Afghan army is relentlessly rounding up Muslims who continue the fight against the invading forces. The Pakistani army is preventing and arresting those who wish to participate in Jihad in Kashmir. The Palestinian forces are being trained to search, arrest, and destroy the Mujahideen who refuse to give up the call of Jihad against Israel. Hence what of the new Iraqi army? No doubt it will serve as the new Mukhabaraat (security services) of the

The Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, Morshed Khan, introduced the US Secretary of State Colin Powell to the journalists in Dhaka with the following words: "It is my great pleasure to welcome my very good friend, Secretary of State Colin Powell. His visit to Bangladesh is more than symbolic. It recognises and reinforces the traditions of friendship and cooperation that so happily exist between our two countries." On 19th June Colin Powell made a brief visit to Bangladesh. He made the stopover to the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka on his way to Jordan from Cambodia. While in Bangladesh,

A quick study of the issues that were raised in Powell's visit shows the reality of relationship between America and the Bangladeshi government. It is not one of "friendship and cooperation" but one of subservience and dependency. While Powell was raising matters of utmost importance to US political and economic interests, the Bangladeshi government was raising issues such as poverty and employment that every nation must solve domestically, if it cares about its independence. The government of Bangladesh should realise that no people ever became prosperous and gained political independence by integrating its politics and economy with a foreign, capitalist and hostile nation such as America. It is clear that blame for Bangladesh's current situation can be traced back to American policies meted out in the guise of the IMF and the World Bank and the list of structural readjustment polices used to exploit the wealth of the Muslims. Saleh Abed

MUSHARRAF REAFFIRMS HIS COMMITMENT TO AMERICA

"We want a long-term relationship between the two countries, a relationship with depth and breadth," said the self appointed President Musharraf during his recent four-nation European and US tour, referring to his relationship with America. He is the same dictator who came to power after a military coup, but since his unstinting support to the American foreign policy

and support in fighting sincere Muslims who America calls terrorists, he has been given the red carpet treatment during his visit. In fact as a reward, Musharraf went to Camp David, where only close friends of the American President are invited. A Foreign Office Spokesman, Masud Khan, at a news briefing said the focus at Camp David would be on the recent peace initiative over the issue of Kashmir, highlighting one of the main aims of Musharraf's' visit to the West. President Bush confirmed this when he said that the "friendship between the United States and Pakistan is vital to the security and stability of South Asia". Musharraf's visit to Britain, France and Germany is no more then a faรงade for the real reasons for the visit Musharraf reaffirming his commitment to the American policy in Pakistan and the region. Other issues discussed during Musharraf's trip included an agreement in principle to send troops to Iraq, which will be doing no more then the dirty work of the Americans and the British, and a possible rethink in Pakistan's policy towards Israel. President Bush on 24th June had laid down a list of landmark changes in Pakistan's policy, which are expected to be met by Musharraf. The $3 billion aid package promised by Bush over the next five years is conditional to an annual review of Pakistan's cooperation with American aims in the region and mainly relates to defence and security. This includes a clear 'road map' for resolution of the Kashmir conflict, which will allow further American intervention in the region, a continuous support in clamping down on Muslims who are against any foreign intervention and those who are working to resume the Islamic political system, all in the name of fighting terrorism. Part of the American plan is to make India as a regional power, which includes capping the Pakistani nuclear programme. All of the issues discussed in Washington, if agreed and implemented, would allow American aspirations for the region to be visualised, significantly marginalizing China and Russia.

politicians urge the nation that since September 11th, the war to disarm the potential terrorists is not a war on Islam, it seems some of the population of Wrexham disagree. Recent events saw the targeting of Iraqi Kurds on the Caia Park Estate, a so-called safe haven for the Kurdish refugees. The Caia Park Estate is one of the largest and most troubled of its kind in the country, with high levels of unemployment and acute social problems. Some 60 or so Kurds have been housed here, largely single males. The ferocity of the attacks surprised both police and community Leaders, who want to attribute this to simple local racial tensions. It seems more likely that many of the rioters saw this as an opportunity to exert their view about the war against Iraq and 'do their bit'. It only took a simple incident between a refugee and a local resident that sparked Sunday night's violence, but it is obvious that the feelings in the community toward the Kurdish Muslims had been simmering for a while. The riots left four policemen and a cameraman injured and fourteen people under arrest - a figure certain to rise as police round up the alleged troublemakers. This chain of events has been all too familiar in the past few years and especially since the offensive against Iraq, with incidents being cited all over the country. It wasn't too long ago when a Kurdish refugee was killed in Glasgow. Many Muslims have been targeted and will continue to be as long as they remain different from the indigenous population. The refugees have been moved to other towns nearby such as Stoke. It seems they may have escaped Saddam but not quite to safety. Dr Qaiser Malik

HALAL MEAT THREATENS TO TRAP MUSLIMS IN CHEAP STRUGGLE For Muslims living in the UK the relatively easy availability of Halal meat has been something taken for granted and a facility that they could not imagine being without.

Nadeem Ilyas

WREXHAM RIOTS - IRAQI KURDS FEAR FOR THEIR LIVES - NOT JUST IN IRAQ It appears the war against Iraq's WMD and terrorism has found a new battlefield - Wrexham. Whilst the

However, the supply of Halal meat within the Muslim community has come under attack on two fronts. Firstly, animal rights activists have recently branded the Islamic method of slaughter as barbaric and inhumane. Secondly the FSA (Food Standards Agency) has announced that adulteration of chicken meat is

common and currently legal across the EU. This involves the impregnation of chicken meat with extra water and hydrolysed proteins from animal processing waste including that from beef and pork - something that labelling does not highlight. Sir John Krebbs, the FSA chairman, said on the 19th June, "The only reason to add protein to chicken is to pump up the water to high levels. That is why we consider that the amount of water that can be added to chicken should be limited and the use of non-chicken proteins banned." Almost as quickly as this issue of Halal meat arose, it was resolved and the topic was no longer on people's lips. This scandal and the possibility of a ban on Halal meat, quite conveniently for the government, had certain effects on the Muslims. Firstly it reminded the Muslims that this is not a state run by Islam and so even the basic provisions and comforts that we have are subject to banning or confiscation. This applies to the British 'generosity' in allowing Halal meat, Masaajid, Muslim schools, etc. Secondly, this issue had the effect of distracting Muslims from the affairs of Muslims in other countries as they focused on and became active on petitioning against a ban. The West would love for the Muslims to abandon the concept of a global Ummah and focus on individualistic issues. Thirdly, and most importantly, these incidents aimed to build confidence for the Western capitalist system to resolve problems. It would have been ridiculous for the government to ban animal slaughtering, but this scare tried to show the Muslims that they should lobby their MPs and participate in Western politics to solve their problems and again reinforce a sense that the state is able to look after their affairs. If the Muslims fall for this cheap struggle over Halal meat, then it will be a victory in the attempt to integrate the Muslims into Western society. Ramim Mohammad

News

Powell met with important Ministers, including the Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. Among the important issues raised by Powell included support for the 'war on terrorism', Bangladesh as a 'moderate Muslim Democracy', assistance in supervising Iraq and Bangladesh not to support the idea of International Court of Justice. The issues that the Bangladeshi government raised with Powell included US investment in Bangladesh, garment exports to US, poverty alleviation and Bangladeshi nationals in US since 9/11.

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

UZBEKISTAN THE WEST'S MURDEROUS ALLY AGAINST ISLAM WAL EE D GU B AR A

n Uzbekistan, away from the spotlight of the world's attention, a bloody campaign of immeasurable brutality has been raging. A campaign is sweeping across the whole country and terrorising an entire society in what can only be described as "mass intellectual cleansing." All this is happening as the political leaders of Western powers are queuing up to make friends with Uzbekistan, giving their blessing for the work done by their new ally Islam Karimov.

In 1992 when the Soviet Union broke up Uzbekistan gained its independence, though it still remained linked to Russia militarily, politically, economically and in terms of security, through 'The Commonwealth of Independent States' (CIS).which was established as a substitute for the former Soviet Union.

live their rich heritage which contributed so much to the Muslim Ummah and gave birth to some of the great scholars, like Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Nasafi and Zamakhshari. They began to return to the fold of Islam. They went back to cleaning their Mosques, most of which the Russians had turned into alcohol store houses and pig pens. They proceeded to give money and accept donations from their Muslim brothers outside the country in order to restore old Mosques and to build new ones.

No sooner did the godless communism collapse its inhabitants felt that they had become freed from the slavery of communism and the dictatorship of the Russians that suppressed their love for Islam which was forbidden to them for three quarters of a century

And when it seemed to Uzbekistan's Muslims that they where turning a new leaf, that the future was looking bright, darkness descended upon them when the ruling party, under the Presidency of Islam Karimov, began to forbid the acceptance of any donations coming from outside if it was for building Mosques, establishing Islamic schools or any type of Islamic activity. And as rapidly as it left, the legacy of the communist era had returned to Uzbekistan.

It was a time to rejoice Islam could now finally become a major part of their lives they could now

They began again to close down Mosques and imprison Imams and Khatibs who did not sing the

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

praises of the ruling party. They forbade the use of loudspeakers for the Adhan in the Mosques and shut down a majority of them. For example, in the city of Namangan there were ninety eight Jami'a Mosques. The authorities closed all of them down except nine and began to plot the assassination of certain daw'ah carriers, causing the rest to disappear and arresting countless others. It was repression all over again for Uzbekistan's Muslims, for a war of oppression began to be waged against them that still continues today.

KARIMOV THE TYRANT For over the past decade the government of Islam Karimov has waged a relentless war on the Muslims of Uzbekistan to make the people to reject Islam all together, for the call for Khilafah in Uzbekistan began to win favour amongst the majority of Muslims, the young and the old, the poor and the rich to the point that it spilled through Uzbek borders and has now become a driving force in the whole of the Central Asian region.

uzbekistan - the west's murderous ally against islam

As a result he began to target all mosques and Imams ensuring that the only Islam that they preached was His version a secular Islam devoid of any substance. Any discussion on political Islam was officially banned and considered a crime, Muslims who prayed regularly were arrested, bearded Muslims were arrested, Muslims who attended group discussions on Islam were arrested. Sisters who wore Hijab were forbidden, even from walking the streets and banished completely, and any one who criticised his war on Islam was arrested. And when it seemed to him that he was on top of things that no one would dare to challenge his fascist fist, the strength of Islam began to display itself in the Uzbek society. From amongst the people men weere lining up to account his every move to challenge his every step, to criticise him openly and shame him to the world for the criminal that he is, without any fear seeking only Allah's pleasure adopting only nonviolent political means. And as his brutality increased the call for Khilafah strengthened and its success reached such an extent in Uzbekistan that the state mufti went on television a number of times to attack the concept of Khilafah, saying that there is no Khilafah system in Islam. He said "expunge the word Khilafah from your hearts and get it out of your minds". And the Head of the committee of religion stated on television: "there is no state, Khilafah or Jihad in Islam". And when the people ignored the words of these hypocrites and no government imam was able to counter this call the countries top thinkers, philosophers and clergy where called in to develop an new ideology to appeal to the people instead of Islam and the call for Khilafah. 'To fight an objective with an objective, a thought with a thought, and ignorance with knowledge' became a slogan of Karimov new propaganda. And when he failed to develop an Ideology better than that of Allah's, he began to fight an objective with killing, a thought with imprisonment, and combat the light carried by the carriers of the dawah with the darkness of his torture chambers hoping to break the spirit of these men and women. Tens of thousands of Uzbek Muslims have been unlawfully arrested, thousands have been tortured and dozens have been killed in extra-judicial executions.

Uzbek Muslim women have been threatened with gang rape during interrogation, elderly women in their 70s have been stripped naked and exposed to rapists and murderous in an attempt to make their sons confess to fictitious terrorism charges. Muslims in prison report that they have been subjected to continuous and cruel battery, repeated anal rape and the insertion of metal bars in the private parts, incarceration in basement cells in conditions intolerable for any human being. Some have been injected with HIV infected blood for adhering to their Islamic prayer rituals and refusing to seek clemency from President Karimov. Amnesty International, in its 2002 annual report stated, "Suspected members or supporters of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, were separated from other prisoners and made to run between two lines of guards who beat them with truncheons as they passed. There were also allegations that devout Muslim prisoners were subjected to beatings, humiliation, forced labour and rape by other prisoners with the complicity of prison authorities. They were forced to sing the national anthem and were severely beaten if they refused to do so. There were consistent allegations that devout Muslim prisoners were punished if they were caught praying or reading the Qur'an, and that their beards were forcibly shaved."

THE MARTYRS OF UZBEKISTAN The most recent example of this onslaught is that of Orif Eshonov, a 38-year-old member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, A father of four young children, detained by the Uzbek security services in Karshi in early May of this year, his crime: he wants to live under Islam he says the rule is only for Allah. After being held incommunicado he was brutally killed in custody on May 15. When this decent God- fearing man's body was returned to his family the signs of Karimov's war on Islam were clear for all to see. Orif's body had heavy bruising to the arms, shoulders, upper chest, legs and soles of the feet. There were open wounds to one arm and his back. Several ribs had been broken and needles had been inserted under his fingernails.

tyrant. Umar 'Aleef Hasan, On the 29th of April 1999 the body of Umar who was arrested for his membership of Hizb ut Tahrir was delivered to his family signs of severe torture could be seen on the body: a swollen head, torn mouth, broken ribs, marks left by chains around the hands and feet, effects of beating and electricity on all parts of the body, even though the medical examiner tried to remove these signs using various means. A few days before his murder, they mentioned in front of him the acts of torture the guards inflict upon people in the prisons, that they intentionally beat the area of the liver (i.e. sensitive areas) to increase the severity of the torture and injury to the Muslims to try to scare him. What was the reply of this upright man, of this warrior? He replied to that by saying: 'What is one liver! I will sacrifice a thousand livers in the path of Islam!' May Allah accept you as one of the Martyrs ya Umar. Farhad Usmanov Farhad was arrested on the 14th of June 1999 for his possession and distribution of a leaflet. They transported him to the department of police in Zinjiyaniq where he remained for 24 hours. Then he was transferred to the Tashkent police headquarters where they kept him for 3-4 days. Finally, they transported him to the ministry of the interior. In all of these police stations they demanded one thing from him, which was that he seek forgiveness and apologise for his action or face the consequence. And every single time he would stand firm and refuse to seek forgiveness from tyrant Karimov or apologise for worshiping Allah swt. He would rather feel the pounding fists and batons on his face and limbs than seek forgiveness for being a true Muslim, he would rather feel the electricity pass through his body and smell the burning of his skin than apologise for being Allah's slave. When his body was delivered to his family his skull had been opened and his brain was removed. On his chest, feet, back and limbs there were signs of gruesome torture. The Uzbek Government claimed he died of a heart attack. On the day of his funeral on the 26th of June thousands poured into the streets of Tashkent to attend the burial for he was a man known and respected for his taqwa, piety and love for Islam. Muhammad (saw) said:

And one would think that from such methods of torture that this will act as a hindrance and not a catalyst for the work, but the examples of the dawah carriers prove their resolve against the July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

uzbekistan - the west's murderous ally against islam

"The best Jihad is the word of truth spoken before a tyrant ruler." Muzafar Avazov

accounts have never been heard

France-Presse, April 2, 1999.

May Allah (swt) bless them in His Paradise and accept them with the Prophets, Siddiqeen, Shaheeds and the righteous. Ameen!

The suffering of the Da'wah carriers in Uzbekistan is quite obviously due to the tyrant and villain, Karimov, who is the ally of Shaytan and who will never desist fighting the sincere Muslims.

The body of Muzafar Avazov a religious prisoners

There is not a 'Human Rights Organisation' on the face of this earth that has not written and submitted to the UN and western governments report after report, article after article detailing the atrocities committed by Karimov's government against independent Muslims in Uzbekistan and yet they have remained ignored. at Jaslik Prison, was returned to his family members for burial in Tashkent Thursday 8th August 2002. He was sentenced in mid-2000 to 20 years in prison that was reduced on appeal in February 2001 to 19 years accused of membership of Hizb ut-Tahrir. According to Human Rights Watch the body of Muzafar showed clear signs of torture. He had been imprisoned at Jaslik Prison, well-known for its harsh conditions and ill-treatment and torture of religious prisoners. Human Rights Watch has learned that the body of Muzafar a 35-year old father of four, showed signs of burns on the legs, buttocks, lower back and arms. Sixty to seventy percent of the body was burnt, according to official sources. Doctors who saw the body reported that such burns could only have been caused by immersing Avazov in boiling water. Those who saw the body also reported that there was a large, bloody wound on the back of the head, heavy bruising on the forehead and side of the neck, and that his hands had no fingernails. Human Rights Watch received reports that prison authorities had beaten Muzafar Avazov and put him in a punishment cell for stating that nothing could stop him from performing his prayers when he was ordered to stop.

“Among the believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allâh of them some have fulfilled their obligations (i.e. have been martyred), and some of them are still waiting, but yielding to no change [i.e.they never proved treacherous to their covenant which they concluded with Allâh] in the least.” [TMQ AlAhzab: 23] And there are hundreds and thousands whose accounts are similar, and countless who's 10

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

However, the Muslims in Uzbekistan are following the method of the Prophet (saw) and with the help of Allah (swt), they will be able to overcome their ordeal.

"If you help (in the cause of) Allah, He will help you, and make your foothold firm" [TMQ Muhammad: 7] z AMERICA & KARIMOV PARTNERS IN THE WAR ON ISLAM A mere glance at the relationship between America and Uzbekistan will reveal that America is in full support of this campaign. Fighting the rise of political Islam and attempting to distance the Muslim ummah from khilafah are in harmony with America's objectives of its 'War on Terror'. Last year alone the Uzbek Government received $500 million dollars no doubt for services rendered in their fight against Islam, of which $79 million was allocated to the police and intelligence services. There is not a 'Human Rights Organisation' on the face of this earth that has not written and submitted to the UN and western governments report after report, article after article detailing the atrocities committed by Karimov's government against independent Muslims in Uzbekistan and yet they have remained ignored. Instead today the enemy of Islam Karimov is the US's the strongest ally in its so called war against terrorism, confirming without a shadow of a doubt that it is a war on Islam and nothing else. The words of Karimov show his full dedication to this war, following are quotes of his description of his campaign. "Everyone must understand the futility of the attempts to reason with this evil; that no country can afford to stand aside from the battle against this plague of the 21st century. There can be no compromise, no deals struck with this vicious monster of modern times." "Such people must be shot in the forehead! If necessary, I'll shoot them myself…!" "I'm prepared to rip off the heads of 200 people, to sacrifice their lives, in order to save peace and calm in the republic…If my child chose such a path, I myself would rip off his head." - Agence

BBC DEMONISES ISLAM BUT FAILS TO BRING AN INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE S H AH JAH A N M A L IK

n a recent episode of the BBC drama, "Spooks" a sensationalised storyline was run, based around a Birmingham mosque where the Imam endeavoured to recruit young Muslims to undertake "suicide attacks," in the UK. The programme received hundreds of complaints prior to the broadcast and the programme culminated with a 16year old Muslim youth walking around a Birmingham playground strapped with explosives. The whole programme focused on how the Masjid was used as a place where impressionable young Muslim youth were "indoctrinated," so much so that there was not even a single scene that showed anyone praying.

military service every year without any mention in the Western media, so the question on the minds of many people is, "why does the media demonise Islam?"

This latest attempt by the Western media to demonise Islam has unsurprisingly led to a rise in anti-Islamic feeling towards the Muslim community. It has perplexed many Muslims as to why the BBC would want to show such a programme at a time where tensions are already running high. Therefore it came as no surprise that a Birmingham Masjid was being vandalised with the words, "Kill the suicide bombers," sprayed on its walls and an assault on a Muslim student, from the city's university by two white youths telling him "you have been spooked." If we put things into perspective, we can see that this open attempt by the Western media to demonise Islam is not a new phenomenon. Rather we can cite examples from all sections of the media. The Sun newspaper issued a Muslim alphabet where "A," was for Ayatollah and "T," was for terrorist. The Hollywood film industry routinely depicts Muslims as "terrorists," bent on hijacking aeroplanes and the stereotypes of oppressed Muslim women being forced into arranged marriages are all too familiar.

THE INTELLECTUAL BANKRUPTCY OF THE WEST

So one thing has become abundantly clear, that there is a concerted media drive to put Muslims and Islam under the spotlight. This media attack was further exemplified in the aftermath of a bombing in Tel-Aviv in May, which was allegedly carried out by two British born Muslims. The media focused in on this story, with the editorial of the Times claiming that the bombers were "British converts to terror," who had responded to the "corrupting message of jihad." Moreover Muslims were told to clamp down on ideas such as jihad being propagated within the Muslim communities, clearly a signal that it is unacceptable for Muslims to believe Islam is anything more than simply a religion. The Daily Telegraph wrote, "It is no longer enough for Muslim community leaders to take to the airwaves after every atrocity involving Islamic fundamentalists to argue that they represent a small minority. The fundamentalists need to be confronted directly in their communities by those who represent a law-abiding majority largely cut off from the predominant culture." All of this was despite the fact that hundreds of Israeli citizens that live in the UK travel to Israel for

The Western media does not attempt to challenge the intellectual basis upon which the Islamic belief is based. Rather what we see is a superficial propaganda, attacking particular rules that emanate from this basis. This is quite irrational, as attacking and demonising Islamic rules such as jihad or the obligation for Muslim women to wear the headscarf, without actually addressing the basis that drives Muslims to undertake these actions is as futile as trying to demonise Islamic concepts such as angels or jinn, without challenging the belief that these concepts emanate from. The "spooks," episode in question centred around an Imam who "indoctrinated" young Muslims with the rewards of martyrdom, frequent outbursts of "death to the infidels" and "death to the West." This gave the impression that Muslims who believe Islam is more than simply a religion are being brainwashed by cult like groups with an intellectually baseless belief. The reality is that Islam is a belief that is built upon the intellectual conviction in a creator, by observing the characteristics of the world we live in and arriving at the conclusion, that only an almighty creator could have possibly created all the vast species, elements and landscape that we find in the universe today. Further to this Islam proclaims to humanity that the Qur'an is the word of Allah (swt) and poses an intellectual challenge to humanity to July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

BBC demonises islam but fails to bring an intellectual challenge

match the Qur'an, to simply bring one chapter that is equal to it or to testify to it's authenticity as the speech of the creator to man.

Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged Sûrah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allâh (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [TMQ Hud: 13].

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a Sûrah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allâh, if you are truthful!" [TMQ Yunus: 38]. Although Islam challenges the rest of mankind intellectually, the West chooses not to address the rational basis upon which Islam is built. Their failure to challenge Islam intellectually is nothing more than an exposure of the fact that Western civilisation is built upon the intellectually baseless secular creed of Capitalism. The media are well aware that the capitalists are incapable of mounting a credible challenge to the validity of Islam and any attempt to do so would bare the fallacy of the corrupt capitalist ideology. Therefore it is but predictable that they result in scare mongering, and childish petty insults as their means to attempt to discredit Islam. This type of shallow propaganda in fact is not specific to the BBC, but a rule followed by the entire Western media. Islam is not unaccustomed to propaganda and demonisation. The Prophet Muhammad (saw) himself was faced with a similar organised campaign that recognised that Islam had come to take authority. This campaign worked to distort the pristine message of Islam by using propaganda and slander due to their failure to challenge the belief that Muhammad (saw) was calling for.

approbation of them all. However, they were at variance. Some suggested that they describe him as a Kahin, i.e. soothsayer, but this suggestion was turned down on grounds that his words were not so rhymed. Others proposed a Majnun i.e., one who is possessed by jinn. However, this was also rejected because no insinuations peculiar to that state of mind were detected. They claimed, "Why not say he is a poet?" Here again they could not reach a common consent, alleging that his words were totally outside the lexicon of poetry. "Then let us accuse him of practicing witchcraft," was a forth suggestion. Here also Al-Waleed showed some reluctance saying that the Prophet (saw) was known to have never involved himself in the practice of blowing on knots, and admitted that his speech was a sweet tasting root and branch. He however found that the most plausible charge to be levelled against Muhammad (saw) was witchcraft. The ungodly company adopted this opinion and agreed to propagate one uniform formula to the effect that he would successfully alienate son from father, man from his brother, wife from her husband and man from his clan. (Ibn Hisham).

“And they (Arab pagans) wonder that a warner (Prophet Muhammad) has come to them from among themselves! And the disbeliveers say: "This (Prophet Muhammad) is a sorcerer, a liar.” [TMQ Sad: 4].

THE DEFENCE OF ISLAMAN INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE TO THE WESTERN MEDIA When Muslims interacted with people of other ways of life, they never smeared their practices or defamed them. They always brought intellectual arguments to show the incorrect nature of their religion and the superiority of Islam. One such example was that of Imam al-Baquilani when he encountered the Roman Emperor. Al-Baqilani, a Muslim Scholar and judge, entered the court of the Roman Emperor while he was among his monks and priests. Al-Baqilani mockingly said to one of the priests, "How are you? How are your family and children?"

The Quraish held a meeting aimed at quelling the rise of Islam by organising a slander campaign against Muhammad (saw). They went to see Al-Waleed bin Al-Mugheerah to deliberate on this issue. Al-Waleed invited them to agree to a unanimous resolution that could enjoy the 12

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

The Roman Emperor exclaimed, "We were told that you are the most articulate amongst the Muslim scholars and the most knowledgeable, don't you know that our priests are deemed above having wives and children?" Al-Baqilani answered, "How is it that you can't

deem Allah (swt) above having a wife and children, but you can them? As if they were more sacred than Allah (swt)!" The Roman Emperor was moved by what he heard and from then on felt a great deal of respect for AlBaqilani. (Ad-Da'wah ilallaah, Vol. 1 Issue 4) The Prophet (saw) also did not get caught on the back foot or even address the propaganda that was being spread by the unbelievers regarding Islam and the Prophet (saw). Rather he continued to attack and show the contradiction within the baseless belief that the people followed, such as the belief in the female idols Lat, Manat and Uzza.

"Have you then considered Lat and Uzza, and the third, Manat? Are the males for you and for Him the females" [TMQ An-Najm: 19-21]. Muslims must not become entrapped into simply defending Islam whenever it is demonised and their only action to be a protest to local authorities at their disgust. Muslims must fully comprehend that the reason the Western media attack Islam is because Islam is the only force today that can pose an ideological challenge to Capitalism, with its certain intellectual basis and superior way of life. Therefore Muslims in the West must carry Islam as an ideology and challenge the crooked Capitalist thoughts at every attempt. It is imperative that Muslims in the West become ambassadors for Islam to present an intellectual debate between the Islamic way of life, and the dangers of capitalism. And the BBC, like the rest of the Western media await in fear for the return of the Khilafah State, for it will use its media, and all international dialogue channels to launch a vociferous intellectual challenge to the world, one which the BBC, as it is fully aware, will not be able to answer. z

MUSLIMS AND THE OFFICE DILEMMAS SA I F B AI G

s Muslims living in a society that is based on a culture alien to Islam, it should come as no surprise that we are likely to continuously encounter challenges to our own identity. The British society and culture is built upon the tenets of freedom and the pursuit of material progression at the expense of everything else. Consequently, we see a society with a diminishing level of decency, obsessed with nothing more than sex, alcohol and money. Therefore, it is only natural for the social standards and expectations that are established, to be in direct conflict with the elevated standards that Islam espouses and demands from us. This inevitable clash of cultures can be no more clearly demonstrated than in the high-pressure environment of the workplace.

problems in Palestine and the portrayal of the treatment of women in the Muslim world. When accusing fingers are pointed, do we apologise on behalf of our people or risk being brandished as a fundamentalist and a bigot?

THE PUB CALL

meetings, do we abandon our work responsibilities and answer the call of prayer?

THE JUMMAH CONUNDRUM As for the Muslim working in this society, the test of the work place is far greater than simply a measure of their professional competencies. More and more we find that office life, continuously throws upon us challenges, tests and dilemmas that calls into question our identity as Muslims and even our commitment to abide by the halal and haram. The following issues encapsulate just some of the problems that many of us will face on a day-to-day basis at the work place.

SALAH VS MEETINGS The first real challenge for Muslims revolves around the performance of salah. Once you have overcome the problem of performing ablution in the toilets, the next challenge is finding a quiet place to pray. However, the real test comes during the winter months when most of the prayer times fall within the working day. During periods of heavy workloads and scheduled

Once the issues relating to the daily prayers are addressed, Jummah often proves to be an even greater challenge. After you manage to locate the closest mosque and by the time you travel there, pray and return to the office, the time spent to achieve this may be considerably greater than your permitted time for lunch. Although your manager may appear to be understanding when things are slow, what happens when deadlines approach, systems go down or colleagues are off sick? You may just find that the caring approach is replaced by the questioning of your commitment to the company.

From the first day they join a new department, Muslims are pressurised with "invitations" to participate in the customary drink after work and to get to know the team. This will then be followed by further requests to join leaving parties, business lunches, team building exercises, and basically any other excuse to go down to the pub. So do we risk the possibility of alienating ourselves from our colleagues, or do we find ourselves being dragged along?

HE SAID, SHE SAID Gossip is the cornerstone of the office environment. What is going on in people's private lives, who is falling behind at work, who is flirting with who, are all of a paramount concern to individuals. This backbiting and slanderous culture is rife within the workplace. Does the Muslim distance himself away from the gossip, and risk being the subject of the next set of rumours?

ISLAM ON TRIAL

CHRISTMAS TIME

Since Islam and the Muslims are never far away from the media's spotlight, Muslims in the workplace can expect to be interrogated about their views on everything, from the alleged actions of Osama Bin Laden, to the ongoing

Christmas is a time that the non-Muslims look forward to all year. Cards and presents are exchanged, lunches are arranged and everyone eagerly awaits the infamous Christmas party. A night of food, dance, music, free mixing and an July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

muslims and the office dilemmas

abundance of alcohol. It is a night to let your hair down, an opportunity to make new friends, and also for management to mingle with employees. More importantly, it is a night that everyone is expected to attend. So, do we make our excuses and give the impression that we are not interested in being part of the team? The reason why the significance of these events is promoted is due to the corporate culture that exists within Western companies. Management recognise that corporate goals and targets are best achieved through the creation of a collective feeling for the success of the business and the generation of an atmosphere of teamwork

2. Some Muslims hold on to their Islamic identity whilst at home with their families, but fear the economic consequences of not fitting in to the office environment. Consequently, they feel obliged to fulfil the expectations in their work place by making up their salah after work, so that they can attend meetings and even miss Jummah during stressful periods. They will somewhat apprehensively attend social gatherings at the pub and go along to the Christmas party, spending the evening sitting quietly in the corner drinking orange juice. They justify this approach using the principle of Dururah (necessity), driven by the fear of how they will be viewed by their colleagues and superiors, and how they will

Allah (swt) says:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Or do you think that you will enter paradise without being inflicted with tests as we tested those before you?â&#x20AC;? [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 214]. So it may be second nature for your colleagues to engage in vain and vile talk which they haplessly refer to as "harmless fun" and "innocent banter." However, for a Muslim obscenity and vulgarity is far from harmless as Abu Umama narrates that the Prophet (saw) said,

For many, the fear of losing their jobs or being passed over for promotion drives them to partake in social gatherings and the like, even if it involves free mixing and alcohol. amongst the employees. Consequently, much attention is placed upon team building exercises such as away days, departmental lunches, ad hoc drinks after work, with the highlight being the Christmas party. The contribution and participation in this social culture is a major factor during the hiring process, annual performance reviews, and decisions relating to promotion and bonuses. As a result, Muslims are placed under immense pressure to not only fulfil their contractual obligations, but also the social expectations that go with it.

subsequently be treated.

Faced with these dilemmas, with their perceived careers hanging on the balance, we have seen that Muslims have tended to respond in one of the following manners:

4. Then there are the Muslims that stand tall in their commitment to Islam and personify the Islamic identity and culture. The Muslim that will not only remove themselves from that which Islam prohibits but will take time to explain the position of Islam. A Muslim that will challenge the predominant culture, and demonstrate the elevation that Islam brings to a personality, or to a people and a society as a whole, while continuing to exhibit the best of characters and commitment to fulfilling their contractual obligations.

1. The first category comprises those Muslims that are willing to sacrifice all aspects of their culture so that they become fully integrated within the corporate image of the city worker. Mohammed, Abdullah and Shazneen become "Mo," "Abbs," and "Shaz," just one of the lads. The khimar, (headscarf) and the modest attire are exchanged for a short skirt and orange juice is exchanged for a pint of beer. Their Islamic identity is slowly stripped away from them in pursuit of material success, until all that is left is their surname.

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

3. There are those Muslims that will never compromise on their beliefs and identity, but rather choose to isolate themselves away from the office culture. Interaction outside of the subject matter of work is kept to a minimum, as they never attend social activities and quietly creep away when it is time to pray. When questioned regarding their beliefs, they present Islam as a collection of do's and don'ts without any further elaboration.

So every Muslim must choose a path when confronted with such a test. Do we succumb to the pressures of the trials that are placed in front of us, or do we stand steadfast in our own convictions.

"Obscene words and foul language belong to the devil. These two draw close to the fire and away from paradise." [Tabrani] With regards to the maintaining of prayer in the workplace, often it maybe that Zhuhr salah is not much of a test, as it can be easily performed during the lunch break. However, it is the Asr salah which is much more likely to clash with afternoon commitments and meetings. Nevertheless, when faced with this dilemma a Muslim should question the actual consequences of leaving their desk for five minutes to perform a mundane task and then contrast this with the consequences of missing an obligatory salah (prayer). When put into this context, is it really a choice at all? Allah (swt) says:

"Be guardian of your Prayers, especially the middle Prayer" [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 238]. For many, the fear of losing their jobs or being passed over for promotion drives them to partake in social gatherings and the like, even if it involves free mixing and alcohol. However, a simple glance at the current state of the economy demonstrates that the only thing that is certain in business is the fact that nothing is certain at all.

muslims and the office dilemmas

Newspapers are filled with story after story of the latest round of redundancies, pay cuts and bankruptcies. The reality is that no matter how hard you work, or try to impress the management, your next paycheque may just be accompanied by a P45. For the non-Muslim, the uncertainty of their income drives them to such a state of anxiety, to the extent that they are willing to give up their lives for their jobs. In spite of this, we still find that their jobs are not guaranteed, and can be terminated upon such personal styles as the receipt of a text message. The Muslim on the other hand, should take comfort and have Iman in the fact that our rizq (life's provision) lies solely in the hands of Allah (swt) and from Him (swt) alone we seek our sustenance. Therefore, how could we ever sacrifice the basic tenants of Islam in pursuit of wealth, when it is Allah (swt) Himself who provides it? Allah (swt) says:

"Lo! Allah! It is He that provides and gives livelihood, the Lord of Unbreakable might" [TMQ Al- Dhariyat: 58]. Others may be tested through another form of fear. This time the fear is not the loss of income or their career, but of what their colleagues will think of them and the social exclusion that may come as a result. It is this desire to be accepted by those around them that leads them to compromise on the Shari'ah. They feel that if they differentiate themselves from their colleagues, they may be subject to prejudice, abuse or alienation. However, the truth is that no matter who they are, the nature of the office environment is such, that as soon as someone leaves the room they are likely to be the topic of the next round of gossip. This is the case regardless of whether they are perceived as different or "one of their own." Again, we must ask ourselves who do we fear more, "Tracy from accounts," or our Creator Allah (swt)? When we stand in front of our Rabb (swt), on the day of Hisab, do we want to be accepted, to stand with our colleagues or to stand in the company of the righteous?

Allah (swt) says:

only chance to be touched by its justice. This must also be complimented by a sincere commitment to undertake our work related duties to the best of our ability. Allah (swt) says:

"So fear not man, but fear Me, and do not barter My scriptures for a little gain" [TMQ AlMaidah: 44]. Rather, we should take pride in our culture and identity, proclaim openly our belief and know that our reward lies solely with Allah (swt). Allah swt says:

"My reward is only from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of the Muslimeen" [TMQ Yunus:72]. In the face of all of these trials, and the disdain that we may hold for all that Islam forbids it is not surprising that we may be inclined to isolate ourselves away from our colleagues. However, this will only lead to suspicion and distrust of Muslims and in Islam in general and is likely to lead to even greater discrimination. More importantly, we will be falling short of fulfilling the responsibility that Islam has placed upon us in carrying the message.

"O you who believe! Fulfil your covenants" [TMQ Al Maidah: 1]. This will naturally alleviate the suspicions that may exist towards Muslims and Islam by impressing our colleagues and managers with our honesty, integrity and good character. And if Allah (swt) wills, it may even open their minds and soften their hearts to embracing the light of Iman. However, as Muslims we must realise, that the tests that we face in the workplace are the same tests that are faced by Muslims in schools, communities and the society at large. For we will never truly feel secure and protected until we live in a society that is built upon Islamic values, and permeates a culture and social standards that are in accordance with our own beliefs. Until, such a time, we must prepare ourselves for the continuous struggle to hold on to our identity. z

Ibn Mukhrima narrated that the Prophet (saw) addressed his companions (ra) and said,

"Verily, Allah has sent me as the one who is compassionate to the whole of mankind. Therefore, preach the message of Islam on my behalf, Allah will have mercy upon you." [Tabarani] As Muslims we must be cognisant of the fact that we are the ambassadors of Islam. It is our duty to proactively discuss the intellectual basis of Islam, address issues such as the view of Islam towards segregation, alcohol, and how Islam defines social conduct. It is vital to counteract the negative and bias portrayal of the media towards Islam. For many of our colleagues, we may well be their only real contact with Islam, and their July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

THE MATRIX HOLLYWOOD 'RELOADS' DISBELIEF IN ALLAH NAD EE M A SL AM

All the plots of these films emphasise the uncertainty of there being one definite truth about the unseen or the reality of life and establish firmly the idea of 'seeing is believing'.

ay 2003 saw the worldwide release of the much hyped and highly anticipated film of this year 'The Matrix Reloaded'. It has been applauded for its special effects by the film and television industry the world over and on its release, was watched by millions around the world. Before the release the hype surrounding the film was at fever pitch generated by both the media and companies like Samsung who changed their tag line to be Digital Matrix, with the words Rotating Realities used to describe their new mobile phone with a built in rotating camera. To date 'The Matrix - Reloaded' has netted almost $550m (ÂŁ330m) at the box offices world wide, putting it in the top 20 most successful films of all time.

The Matrix series of films are based around a question posed in the first film 'What is The Matrix?' The film portrays the human race as being enslaved by artificially intelligent machines, which use humans as batteries, to power the world. 'The Matrix' itself is a computer program, which all humans are plugged into, making them believe they are going about their normal business on earth, when their entire lives are just a virtual reality. Three humans have been unplugged from 'The Matrix' and are trying to save the human race from their enslavement. The films present the idea that the world may not be the reality we believe it to be, but we may be existing in parallel with another universe even though it appears to be real, this creates an idea of uncertainty about the origins of life and the unseen (Allah (swt) in the minds of the viewers. The Matrix in the words of Laurence Fishbourne, who plays Captain Morpheus in the trilogy, "is a combination of science fiction, Hong Kong kung 16

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

So, why are these types of films in high demand? What ideas and concepts do these films push or establish? What effects do these films have on society as a whole and the Muslim youth in particular? These are the questions that need answering.

HOLLYWOOD - CONSOLIDATES THE VOID IN CAPITALIST SOCIETY

fu, cyber punk and classic American action, with heavy doses of spiritualism and philosophy". Over the years, the film and television industry has used its creativity to produce a great number of films and dramas, which explore the origins of life and offer a variety of different truths about the unseen, Such as ET, Men in Black, X-Files and Independence day, to name but a few. All these films are based on the finding or existence of aliens or creatures from another universe or planet. So the X-Files emphasises 'The Truth is Out There', yet the whole basis of the program is that any strange happenings are quickly dealt with and covered up by two FBI agents. In the film Men in Black, the truth is also hidden by erasing the memory of people, with special devices, who may have seen an alien or something strange hence leaving the people thinking they had seen nothing abnormal.

The recent cover of the Time Magazine had the words 'Where did God go?' splashed across it with an image of a stained glass window blanked out in white where Jesus should appear. This is an example of the spiritual void left by Capitalism, which is apparent to even non-Muslims within western societies. However rather than to try and answer the question of why western societies refuse to make God a part of their lives and what is the truth about the origins of life, Hollywood produces more fantasy tales for the masses to view. This can be seen by the recent release of the latest Jim Carey movie titled "Bruce Almighty" which is advertised with the strap line, "If you could be God for one week what would you do?" So rather than trying to solve the mysteries of the Universe and its creation, Hollywood insists in indulging the desires of capitalist societies to watch films about the most weird and wonderful scenarios. In order to understand why this uncertainty exists we need to address the intellectual basis of the western viewpoint about life. The capitalist

the matrix - hollywood 'reloads' disbelief in allah

ideology is based on the idea of Secularism, which basically means a detachment of religion from everyday life. This is because capitalism offers no answer to the origin of life and the existence of a Creator, but chooses to ignore it, claiming it as irrelevant in every day life, so religion (God) should be left in the Churches, temples or mosques and rule by mans' laws in every day life. It is because of this idea of secularism and capitalism's failure to answer the questions about the origins of life and the truth about the unseen that the western societies are left with a spiritual void. The spiritual void created by these ideas is what helps generate a great deal of interest and fascination in science fiction films like "The Matrix - Reloaded" and is the fuel for Hollywood to produce similar films in the future. Capitalism is unable to address man's problems in the correct manner and offer mankind tranquillity because it confuses with uncertainty any spiritual or religious emotion or thought. Therefore Hollywood has become the opium of the capitalist society and a means by which people fulfil this spiritual void by attempting to explore the origins of life and the unseen, but in an unserious non-intellectual way, never allowing them to reach the truth.

DANGER TO THE AQEEDAH OF THE MUSLIM YOUTH Films such as these have a powerful effect on society as a whole and in particular the Muslim youth. They actually emphasise the uncertainty about the truth, origins of life and the unseen as well as establishing corrupt concepts like 'seeing is believing'. They also present ideas that some truths can be uncovered by further scientific investigation but these would never include the uncovering of there being one definite truth about the unseen i.e. The Creator (al-Khaliq).

ISLAM COMPREHENSIVELY ANSWERS ALL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ORIGIN AND REALITY OF THIS LIFE The Islamic ideology has not left any questions unanswered whether they are about the origin of life, reality of life in this world and about there being one definite truth about the unseen i.e. the Creator Allah (swt). Islam addresses all these questions in an intellectual and comprehensive manner and establishes it as a rational fact not based on any scientific investigation, superstition or mythology. Allah (swt) says to the whole of mankind, in Surah Ale-Imran:

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of night and day, these are indeed signs for men of understanding." [TMQ Surah Ale-Imran: 190] And in Surah Al-Baqarah

"Behold! In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts therein, and in the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth are signs for people who have sense." [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 164]

In the above ayah, Allah (swt) is addressing the Muslims and is telling them that he has completed their Deen therefore all the answers to any questions lie within the Deen of Islam. The ideas of other opinions on this matter have no room in any Muslim's life because as Muslims we need to refer to the Islamic evidences in order to derive an opinion on any question posed to mankind. It can clearly be seen that Hollywood culture promotes the ideas that no truth is certain and the uncertainty about the unseen, hence the disbelief in Allah (swt) which can have a detrimental effect on society and in particular on the Aqeedah of Muslims who will inevitably be affected by these ideas. Muslims should be aware and take care to avoid such culture and ideas, and establish in the Muslim youth a firm conviction in the existence of Allah (swt), based on rational thought and firm facts. When such ideas are presented in future to the Muslim youth they will be able to easily dismiss them and be steadfast in their Aqeedah and the belief in the unseen, Allah (swt). z

In the above ayat Allah (swt) is addressing mankind in general both the Muslims and the non-Muslims and is encouraging them to think about the reality man perceives in everyday life like the alternation of the day and night, or the changes in the weather patterns. But it also compels man to contemplate on the creation of the heavens and the earth, as these are all signs for men of understanding. This contemplation and thought would ultimately lead to man arriving to the correct conclusion about his reality and the unseen through the conclusive evidence for the existence of a Creator, Allah (swt). It is because of these conclusive and definite rational evidences about the existence of Allah (swt) that Muslims have tranquillity and so never need to explore any other alternatives to the truth about the existence of the Creator, the origins of life and the reality of life in this world. Allah (swt) says in Surah Al-Ma'idah:

"This day, I have perfected your religion (Deen) for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." [Surah Al-Ma'idah: 3]

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

THE ATTACK ON THE VEIL S UL TA NA H PA RV IN & SH AZI A AKH TAR

s the Muslim Ummah all over the globe witnesses the military attack being waged upon her lands, she must be ever mindful of the ongoing intellectual attack against her Deen. In fact the West has undertaken a very strategic plan to degrade and demoralise Islam and the Muslims. At the head of this assault is the age-old notion of Islam's lack of liberty, freedom and its oppression of women. The most infamous of which is the somewhat unoriginal yet predictable 'attack on the veil'. And although this line of discourse may be a little dated, every Muslim should clearly understand the extent of its effects and its use in the present political climate. This age old attack is currently being used to fan the flame of hysteria against Islam. Questions have arisen once again; is Islam oppressive? How does it oppress the woman? Is the Muslim woman's dress appropriate in the West? How should the West liberate her? Thus the wheels of this discussion have been set in motion once again, seeking not only to defame Islam but even more specifically to erode the very identity of the Muslim woman. The West has worked arduously to nurture a host of concepts, which fundamentally contradict the Islamic viewpoint on life with the aim of replacing the concepts of Islam, which characterise the Islamic identity. When we look to the history of this attack, we will find such campaigns in the past were spearheaded by so called Islamic 'thinkers' who sought to propagate ideas such as modernism, secularism, the 18

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

spirit of Islam and the emancipation of the Muslim woman. Examples of such individuals who happened to be highly acclaimed in Britain in the 19th century are Amir Ali and Qasim Amin. Amir Ali in one book discussed how the 'purdah' (Islamic dress) contradicted the true 'spirit of Islam' while Qasim Amin proposed that the fate of the Muslim woman was to be no more than that of a slave and that covering in the Islamic dress was a clear illustration of male domination and the female insignificance. A glimpse at the legacy of such 'thinkers' reveals that their absolute devotion to the West, especially Britain lead them to propagate the view that the abandonment of Islam and the Islamic values were to be the salvation of the Muslims and the Muslim woman. In the past, this attack was part of a substantial intellectual war against Islam, which the kuffar resorted to in order to facilitate their plans of destroying the Uthmani Khilafah. This infamous attack against the 'veil' has, in this century, been recycled and in the last 18 months the Muslim woman has witnessed a systematic and concerted attack against the Islamic dress. Ever since the West launched its war on Islam (also known as the 'War on Terrorism') there has been much said about the 'burka' and its oppression of the Muslim woman, it symbolising her inferior position in society and the west has boasted of its 'Unveiling of Afghanistan'. Those involved in this overt campaign include high profile political and public figures such as the U.S first lady Laura Bush and the British Prime Minister's wife Cherie Blair who commented openly in a press conference, "Nothing

more I think symbolizes the oppression of the woman than the Burka." They have been joined by others in their demonisation of the Muslim woman, which was highlighted by the French presidential candidate Jean-Marie Le Penn's statement concerning the wearing of the Khimar and Jilbaab 'It is good, it protects us from the ugly Women'. This excoriation of the Islamic dress code for women has been matched by leading Western journalists such as Polly Toynbee in her article "Behind the Burka" that appeared in the Guardian: "The top-to-toe burka, with its sinister, airless little grille, is more than an instrument of persecution, it is a public tarring and feathering of female sexuality. It transforms any woman into an object of defilement too untouchably disgusting to be seen. It is a garment of lurid sexual suggestiveness...it turns them into cowering creatures demanding and expecting violence and victimisation...More moderate versions of the garb have much the same effect, inspiring the lascivious thoughts they are designed to stifle." It is in fact with these same lines of attack that the Muslim Ummah in the world around, can interpret events that have even unfolded in their own lands. The most recent of which is the 'Miss World' beauty pageant that was to be hosted in Nigeria in 2002, which in turn caused a host of events to unfold, the most prominent of which seemed to be the outrage on the international scene of how Islam viewed the woman. The hypocrisy, which was clearly

the attack on the Veil

demonstrated at such a time, seemed to go unnoticed. A beauty competition which has in fact become a western institution within itself, in the case of 'Miss World', was not under the microscope as to its obvious degradation of the woman to a mere body (and whose thoughts were secondary, if at all relevant). At such a time the world debated how the Muslims in Nigeria hated women, citing the example of the recent stoning verdict that had been passed over a case of fornication by a young Muslim woman in Nigeria. Coupled with such examples as well as the debate of women in Afghanistan and their apparent 'unveiling', the rulers of the Muslim world took it upon themselves to distance themselves from these realities. They purposefully promoted the western ideals of personal freedom being prevalent in our lands by putting forward Muslim women who seem to have liberated themselves from such notions of covering and embodied everything modern. So examples such as Meraj Khan who works for an NGO in Peshawar, has in recent weeks been used by both the western and Pakistani media to present the face of a liberated 'deveiled' Pakistan versus Hijab clad sisters in the North West Frontier Province who seem to have no names or identity, and resemble the women of Afghanistan pre 'liberation' are commonplace. This can now be put against the backdrop of home grown beauty pageants in Malaysia, the evident westernisation of the wives of all the Premiers in the Muslim world, the booming fashion industry in India etc giving us a clear insight into the way the West has effectively demonised the Muslim woman in her normal attire and made her something who, if not extinct, is alienated and unwanted in her society. These are just some examples of the recent vilification of the Khimar and Jilbaab, the modern day 'Attack on the Veil'. In addition to such public statements, many Muslim women who cover in accordance with the Shari'ah face on a daily basis a barrage of comments and criticisms regarding their Islamic attire, these range from shows of sympathy for the 'poor oppressed covered woman' to abuse and threats hurled at the woman who dares to cover in the Western society. Post 9/11 Muslims living in the West have witnessed an onslaught against the Islamic identity and a blatant policy of integration; calling upon Muslims to embrace the decadent values of capitalism, and to abandon the pure concepts of Islam. This call is designed to bring about a new European-Islamic identity, an amalgamated individual who calls himself a Muslim by belief, yet detaches that belief from life's affairs and instead adopts the Western views on life whether related to marriage and family life, clothing, education or politics. This was highlighted in a statement by the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw; "As British Muslims and their European counterparts become more and more integrated into the fabric of our democracies, we may over time see the emergence of a distinctly European Islam" (Oct 2002).

It should be known that the Muslim woman has not been spared from this conspiracy of the integrationists. The quest to see the Muslim woman truly integrated into the Western society is a quest to strip her of her distinct Islamic identity and to distance her from Islam. The overall aim of such an attack has resulted in the obvious and apparent frustration that is being felt by Muslim women in the West, who are desperately fighting a view that is continually presented of her, thereby almost having to justify her identity. As will be highlighted later on, this is itself a no win situation for her, as her attempts to assert that she is not 'stupid' or voiceless, are ignored and the same old stereotypical, tired depictions of her and 'that veil' are churned out on documentaries, and drama's verging on the ridiculous if not laughable image of her, which harp back to a time where the suntan lotion and the fake beard were a valid substitute to depict the Muslims as a whole. The Western capitalist society values and holds sacred the ideals of freedom; personal freedom of an individual, to do as he or she pleases, to wear what he or she desires, to behave as he or she sees fit. The West regards itself as the pioneer of freedom and the liberator of the woman, shown clearly by the arrogant words of G W Bush at his 2002 State of the Union address (in reference to operation 'Enduring Freedom'); "We went into Afghanistan to free people, because we believe in freedomâ&#x20AC;Ś. Today (in Afghanistan) women are free..." The Western nations pride themselves on the fact that their societies are a place where the woman is given the freedom to make her personal choices of how she treats her body or her own personal property. However, Western societies are plagued with a culture dominated by sex, which promotes a degraded view of the woman as a commodity and formulates the predominant view of the woman as an object to satisfy the desires of men. While the illusion of freedom deceives her, the Western woman is restricted and dictated by an economy driven capitalist society so that she becomes another lucrative source of revenue. Her own personal freedom coupled with the freedom of millions of men to purchase images of her, generates within the pornographic industry in the U.S. an incredible $8 billion per year and in the U.K. an estimated figure of ÂŁ5 million from the sales of pornographic magazines alone. The Western woman mistakenly believes that nobody dictates her appearance, enjoying freedom of individuality and expression, dressing purely as she wishes without restriction. In reality she remains imprisoned in a perpetual state of inadequacy. The wishful notion that with enough time, money, effort and will power she can achieve aesthetic perfection, an impossible standard of human appearance, which she wishes to attain, serves to bolster the market economy. Every aspect of the woman's appearance is dictated by the multi-billion dollar fashion and beauty industry, seasonal fashion trends coercing her to pursue a particular look, a look that in actuality has been constructed by others (predominantly men) who

ensure that her desire to achieve 'the look' and spend in its cause is terminal. This quest to be 'beautiful' earns the U.K. cosmetic industry an annual revenue of ÂŁ8.9 billion while the U.S equivalent grows by 10% each year thanks to the woman's 'freedom' to look as she pleases, as long as she is tall, weighing at least 20% less than what her height requires, has flawless skin, immaculate hair and the most up to date clothes. In the West, the acceptability of the woman's appearance is only determined by the societal view towards her, a view which depicts her as an object, whether in the home or in the workplace. There are numerous cases in which dismissal or disciplinary action has been taken against female employees who refuse to wear skirts in the workplace; the travel company Eurostar has attracted much attention over its stance on the 'Skirt Vs Trousers' debate. As appearance is paramount, unless the woman accentuates her appearance (in this case her legs) her position remains unacceptable. The belief that the woman is free of oppression and truly liberated is therefore a farce, as she is rather bound and subjugated by the capitalist economy and can only aspire to meet the standards which are in reality set by men.

THE VEIL: A SYMBOL OF OPPRESSION AND DENIAL OF FREEDOM So the 'veil' or 'burka', as Cherie Blair described, is deemed by the West to be a symbol of oppression and denial of the personal freedom of the Muslim woman, negating her individualism, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown in The Independent with reference to Muslim women alludes to the idea that when covered, she is "denied the right to be attractive in public places". The fact that this call of freedom and liberation is a principle pillar of the campaign against the Muslim woman's dress is in itself very significant. The Muslim woman is told that when she covers, she allows herself to be oppressed and rather than asserting her personal freedom, she enters into a state of insignificance and backwardness. It must be very clear to Muslims that this attack has been undertaken with very calculated and specific outcome in mind and is not merely a wrangle over a piece of clothing. Rather the attack on the 'veil' is a call to the Muslim woman to embrace the 'sacred' freedoms, which the Western woman is thought to be so fortunate to have been granted. She is told to accept that she is a free individual who has the right to dress as she wishes without restriction in order to "express herself". However this attack on the veil is a direct attack on the Islamic concepts about life. The Muslim woman submits to her Creator as does the Muslim man and as does all of His (swt) creation. The Muslim woman decisively acknowledges that she was created with needs and instincts and like every other human being is limited and in need of guidance to July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

the attack on the Veil

regulate her life. For the Muslim woman this guidance, which is from none other than her creator Allah (swt), extends to every aspect of life, including how she dresses in public. The Western model of personal freedom will inevitably lead both men and women (Insaan) to submit to their own whims and desires or to those of others and such ideas are rejected by the Muslim. It is the decadent value of freedom that allows the woman's status to be reduced to a mere commodity which when 'traded' serves the economic interests of multibillion dollar diet, fashion, cosmetic surgery and pornography industries to name but a few. This freedom sold by the West is therefore unacceptable to the Muslim woman as it is this very ideal, which also makes it permissible for a man or woman to commit fornication, adultery, nudity, and brings the human being to a level even below that of an animal. Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an:

'Have you (oh Muhammad) seen him who has taken as his ilah (god) his own desire? Would you then be a wakil (disposer of his affairs) over him? Or do you think that most of them hear or understand? They are only like cattle; nay, they are even farther astray from the Path' [TMQ Al-Furqan: 43].

THE SUCCESS OF THE ATTACK Thus it can be clearly seen that the objective of the assault on the Khimar and Jilbaab is to rid the Muslim woman of the thoughts of Islam, which preserve her unique identity as a servant of none but Allah (swt). For this attack to be victorious it must conquer the minds, the thoughts and views of those whom it targets, it must successfully pass the Western views to the Muslim woman, eroding her Islamic mindset. In even a more sinister manner, it actually dupes her into believing that she has not in any way abandoned her Islamic belief, only accepted the idea of personal freedom i.e., she has the right to choose for herself what is right or wrong and has the choice of what she should and should not do. In actuality, she adopts the belief that she is not bound in life by her obedience to Allah (swt), and fundamentally chooses to disobey Him (swt). To foster such a view is to violate the Islamic Aqeedah, as Islam is based upon the fundamental tenet of sovereignty belonging to Allah (swt). Therefore the campaign to defame the Islamic dress code has achieved its desired outcome if the Kufr ideal of freedom is accepted. Unfortunately such successes of the 'Attack on the Veil' may go unnoticed if the true objective of the attack is unclear. The triumphs over the Muslim woman's mind, with regard to her view of covering can in essence be categorised as follows: 'To cover is to deny individual liberty and accept oppression'

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

The first victim of this attack is the Muslim woman who accepts the idea that to wear the Khimar and Jilbaab is a symbol of oppression. The Muslim sister who is led to believe that she is a free individual who is at liberty to display her beauty, to express her individuality and must therefore reject any notion of having to cover up. It is understood by such an individual that the order (hukm) to cover is a suppression of the individual freedom and expression and is unacceptable to the Muslim woman of the 21st century. Such a woman has chosen to join the ranks of the much degraded Western woman, lowering her status to a mere commodity and all the while remaining deluded, believing she is liberated.

mentioning the hijab) in government buildings as well as recreating the image of the 'all American' family (who just happen to be Muslim) by producing an advert depicting the 'mom' serving breakfast in a headscarf. It can also seem that there is no ban in many Western states (bar France) on the Khimar, though these are the same nations who have attacked the 'burka' and hailed the 'unveiling' of Afghanistan and Algeria as great liberations. In this instance it becomes clear that such an attack is not simply against the garment worn by the Muslim woman as in some cases it appears to be completely 'acceptable', rather it is against the very reason motivating her to wear it. If she were to cover based on the concept of personal freedom, then her reasoning to do so is on par with that of the Western woman who wears a miniskirt.

'IT'S MY PERSONAL CHOICE' The second victim of this attack is the Muslim woman who is led to believe that she covers, as a show of her personal freedom and it is her 'democratic right' to do so. Many Muslim women may seek to cover in accordance with the Shari'ah, but have taken on the understanding that they have the right and freedom of choice to make the decision to cover or not. An example of this is the response of some Muslim organizations in Britain who commented in response to Cherie Blair's statement by saying: "Wearing a burqa is a women's choice that should be respected, but we agree that there should be no coercion." In addition to this, in Turkey, where the wearing of

'I COVER BUT IT'S FASHIONABLE TOO' The third type of victim is the Muslim woman who covers as a statement of individualism and even allows for the covering to be affected by the Western view of fashion. Many Muslim women feel that that they need to justify or defend the fact that they wear the Khimar and so seek to make covering more acceptable to Western eyes. This view was epitomised by an article in the Independent newspaper on how the 'hijab' could be fashionable. The article included statements from Muslim sisters explaining how covering and at the same time following fashion is "definitely possible" but just required more consideration and effort. Another

When we seek to counteract any form of attack initiated by the Kuffar upon our Deen, the most dangerous of responses is to become defensive by making reasoning that emanates from our mind. the Khimar has been banned in government and public sector buildings since 1997, women have actively pioneered campaigns to change the law. A closer look at the situation reveals that the Muslim woman has become confused regarding the fundamental reason for covering. A leader in the campaign and a member of the Turkish parliament is Sister Merve Kavakci, who in an interview, rather than clearly stating that to cover is a hukm (order) of Allah (swt), explained that her decision to cover in parliament was a test of democracy; "In the twentyfirst century, they must allow us this freedom." She further stated that her right to wear the headscarf was guaranteed by the constitution and international law. Once again such views regarding the covering are in complete conformity with the Western concept of personal freedom and their advocates have fallen prey to the kuffar agenda. The view that the Muslim woman has personal freedom in exercising her choice to cover (or not to cover) at leisure is wholly acceptable to Western observers. For example the U.S government promotes the democratic right of individuals to wear 'religious' clothing (explicitly

example is a recent television documentary in which Muslim women discussed the idea of making the 'Burka' more fashionable and giving it a '21st century edge'. Such discussions seek to bring common ground to the issue of the Muslim woman's dress and Western values. The concept of following fashion is part of the Western culture of consumerism and is largely dependent on the sense of inadequacy, which has been instilled, in the Western woman. The necessity of following fashion, possessing the latest item of clothing, the right shoes or the right handbag is implicit to the Western woman's struggle to meet the societal standard of beauty and acceptability. The motivation to cover for the Muslim woman is the desire to obey and please none but Allah (swt), and is in complete contradiction with the desire to attain a specific appearance based on the trends set by the fashion industry. To discuss the divine hukm (order) revealed by Allah (swt) in the context of the man made, superficial and pretentious concept of 'fashion' is most definitely an insult to the rules of Islam.

the attack on the Veil

'WE COVER TO PRESERVE MODESTY AND TO PREVENT MEN FROM GAZING AT US' The fourth victim of this attack is the Muslim woman who responds in a defensive manner, by justifying from her mind why it is that a Muslim woman covers her 'awrah. She will argue that by wearing the Khimar and Jilbaab, it helps to prevent men from staring at the woman because she is not displaying her charms in an explicit manner that the Western woman is compelled to do in order to fit in with the status quo. Or it is argued that wearing the Islamic dress preserves the modesty of a Muslim woman. When we seek to counteract any form of attack initiated by the Kuffar upon our Deen, the most dangerous of responses is to become defensive by making reasoning that emanates from our mind. This will only weaken our stance as Muslims and ensure that we do not refer to the reasoning given in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, which fits in with the Western agenda to divide the Muslim from her reference point; the Qur'an and Sunnah. The hikmah (wisdom) of Allah (swt) cannot be used as an illah (reason) for undertaking the action, because the result of the action may yield the hikmah or it may not. Thus in the case of the wearing of the khimar and the jilbaab there is no Shari'ah illah (a divine reason given by Allah (swt). This is something which itself is not determined by the opinion of anyone who feels it must have a reason. Rather, we accept the fact that Allah (swt) gave us the guidance of the Qur'an and Sunnah as a Rahma to His slaves to govern their lives, and give them repose. It is therefore an accepted fact if He (swt) sometimes chooses to give a Shari'ah illah (reason) for His (swt) rulings and sometimes a hikmah, neither of which are reasoned by the human mind but both are accepted as stated in the textual evidences. So for a Muslim woman to say that she covers to preserve modesty is inconsistent, because the measure of modesty can vary from person to person and from country to country. Since the measure of modesty can vary, the argument she has taken invariably means that the Islamic dress code can be changed according to the change of time. So this form of discussion only seeks to dilute the pristine identity of the Muslim woman and her view of the Islamic dress. Rather what is the correct view is that the only reason we cover is because it is a command from our Creator, Allah (swt), regardless of whether such an action yields the prevention of men from gazing at the woman or not. No other reasoning is necessary or given in the Qur'an for why the Muslim woman is obliged to cover her 'awrah.

CONCLUSION The Muslim woman submits only to the restrictions, the commands and prohibitions of her Creator. She acknowledges that the Muslim man and woman are not free, but rather restricted by the Shari'ah of Allah (swt).

Allah (swt) says:

'We made for you a Shari'ah, so follow it, and not the fancies of those who have no knowledge' [TMQ Al Jathiya: 18]. When the Muslim woman leaves her home in the khimar and jilbaab, she does so as an act of worship to none other than her Creator, her Rabb, Allah (swt). The attack on the veil is an attack upon the Muslim woman's worship to Allah (swt), an attack on the fact that she seeks to adhere to the Hukm Shar'i and not to the kuffar values of capitalism. Allah (swt) has legislated what is Halal and what is Haram, and He (swt) has legislated that the covering of the Muslim woman is Fard (obligatory).

has a new host of victims. A new generation of Muslim women living in the West trying it's hardest to retain their honourable Islamic identity. A generation who are holding to rope of Islam by understanding what it asks of them and not shying away from this regardless of the consequences. These are whom it seeks to enrapture with its decadent notions of 'liberation', 'individualism' and 'choice'. O Sisters of this Noble Ummah! You must shun the Western concept of freedom, which calls upon you to abandon your obedience to Allah (swt), only to become enslaved by the greed and the desires of man. When you look to the Western woman, you should clearly see her misery and inferior position in society, which has resulted from the capitalist ideals of freedom, and you must reject such Kufr. When you cover in the Khimar and the Jilbaab, it is only for the sake of Allah (swt) and not because you have personal freedom of choice. Do not seek to pollute the pure reason for following the order of Allah (swt) as He (swt) says:

"And let them draw their khimar (head scarves) over their juyub (necks and bosoms)'"[TMQ An-Nur: 31]. And He (swt) said:

"It is not fitting for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter that they should have any say in the matter. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into error." [TMQ Al-Ahzab: 36].

"O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloak (jilbaabs) all over their bodies." [TMQ Al-Ahzab: 59].

O Sisters! Safeguard your identity as Muslim women by preserving and retaining the purity of the Islamic thoughts and never adopting the thoughts of kuffar. Rather view your noble position as it is seen through the eyes of your Deen, this being your obedience to Allah (swt) without exception. And work hard for the Khilafah State, which will bring justice to humanity and which will surely also seek to liberate the Western woman from her blind subservience to Capitalism. z

So the only reason for covering is the fact that Allah (swt) commanded it of the Muslim woman and in fulfilling the obligation she obeys Him (swt) and gains His pleasure and abundant reward in the hereafter. Adopting any other, Western inspired, reasoning for wearing the Khimar is unacceptable and lends support to the 'Attack on the Veil', each time a Muslim woman allows her Islamic motives for covering to be affected by the Kufr concept of personal freedom, she allows the attack to achieve success. She herself falls prey to the oppression that the Capitalist ideology can only manage to achieve leaving the woman feeling that her only redeemable attribute is her outward makeup, which will then define her worth in society. The Muslim Ummah at large should be astute to the attack unfolding in front of her very eyes. An attack whose origins lay in those first attempts by both Muslims and non-Muslims to distort the Islamic way of life by attacking the Islamic concepts about life. Such concepts about the Muslim woman and her attire were cleverly manipulated then, and we see that the West sees the benefits of such an attack once again. And so the remodelled, repackaged 21st century attack on the veil was born once more, and

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

AMERICA INITIATES REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN AB I D M U STA FA

n June the 11th, thousands of Iranians took part in anti-government demonstrations in Tehran, the capital city of Iran. What began as a demonstration by students against government plans to privatise university education quickly turned into a vehement protest against the conservative rulers of Iran and its reformist President. On the second night of demonstrations, it was reported by the BBC that the crowds were shouting "death to Khamenei [the supreme leader of Iran]" and "Khatami should resign [the President of Iran]". Others shouted "Tanks, artillery and guns no longer have any power." Despite clamping down on the protestors the demonstrations continued and the authorities were unable to quell the students leading the protest. By now the students were openly calling for regime change - slogans of "freedom, freedom", "democracy, democracy" and "Khamenei the traitor must be hanged" were reverberating amongst the dissenters. The pressure on the conservative leadership increased, and on Monday June 16th culminated in more than 250 Iranian intellectuals calling on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to relinquish his status as Iran's "supreme leader" and abandon the principle of being God's representative on earth. The statement also backed the call for democratic reform made by 120 liberal legislators back in May, saying: "We, university teachers, students, writers and political activists, thank and support the letter by lawmakers addressed to the supreme leader that respectfully mentioned people's minimum demands and voiced national concerns."

The question that arises is; what has lead to this rapid change of circumstances in Iran? On June 11th it was reported by the BBC that numerous people joined the student demonstrators after hearing about their protests from US-based satellite TV channels. It was reported by the Chicago Sun-Times that many of those who took to the streets first learned of the protests from satellite channels, run by American-based exile groups. They 22

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

include National Iranian Television, which is run by the exiled monarchist Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah. In a recent interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, Reza Pahlavi declared his abhorrence of the Iranian regime. He said, "The fall of the current regime would not only liberate the forces of a great nation, it would free the world of an imminent atomic risk and the biggest terrorist network in existence." He is joined by another dissident, Mahmudali Chehragani, who heads the Southern Azerbaijan National Awareness Movement and whom US officials met on June 4th to solicit his help to overthrow the Iranian regime. A day before the meeting with US officials, Chehragani made clear his intentions and said, "Our aim is to create a democratic, modern, and secular state with a federal system in Iranâ&#x20AC;Ś" He also spoke of how his organisation is in constant contact with other Iranian minorities, including Kurds, Baluchis, Turkmen, and Arabs. As for the meeting between US officials and Chehragani, the Washington Times reported that Chehragani is just one dissident Iranian with whom the United States occasionally speaks, the officials said, but they are not specifically trying to encourage internal opposition or support a change in government. "The role of the U.S. is to communicate to the Iranian people our firm support for their democratic aspirations and human rights, and to let them know their voice is heard", the

officials said in a statement. To further bolster US efforts to bring a democratic change in Iran the US is considering setting up web sites. Reuters reported that a US official said, "Something that we are looking at now (is) to what extent some of the $100 million could be used to do things like set up Web sites, for example, that would be in Farsi that would help to support democratic change in Iran." Expressing concern at American initiatives to undermine the Iranian government, Hashemi Rafsanjani (former Iranian President) called on students to be vigilant and not to be influenced and misled by US conspiracies. He warned that the antirevolutionaries, former members of SAVAK (intelligence agency of the former regime) and monarchists should not think that they can fish from troubled waters and take advantage of the recent events. Later Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country's supreme leader, said the United States was making Iranians mercenaries in its bid to destabilise Iran. So from these reports and others it is evident that despite official US denials, America is actively using the electronic media and human resources on the ground to foment anti-state protests in Iran. Incidentally, this is not the first time the US has instigated anti-state demonstrations to topple Iranian governments. In the early fifties, America executed 'operation boot' to get rid of the Prime Minister Mossadeq who upset the British by nationalizing the oil industry. The operation involved British intelligence and the CIA orchestrating demonstrations against Mossadeq, which gave much needed confidence to his opponents (the Royalists) who subsequently removed him from office. In the late seventies, the CIA used SAVAK to instigate public uprising against the Shah, which eventually led to his exile and paved the way for Khomeini to take the reigns of power. The current manoeuvres by the US administration to bring about regime change are no different. Sandwiched between American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, America is encouraging the reformists to get rid of its

america initiates regime change in iran

conservative leadership. The protestors received an extra bout of encouragement when President George W Bush described the demonstrations in Tehran as the beginning of a "new and free Iran". He said, "Freedom is a powerful drive for people - and it's the beginnings of people expressing themselves toward a free Iran, which I think is positive." He also warned the Iranian government not to harm the protestors. He said, "They need to know America stands squarely by their side, and I would urge the Iran government to treat them with the utmost of respect." Although the US government has so far not explicitly stated that the removal of the conservatives from power is their objective, it is hard to believe that they could possibly have any other motive. In addition to fomenting public sentiments against the conservative rulers, America is also seeking to increase the pressure on the regime via other means. Lately, the Bush administration has been pressing European countries, Russia and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to declare that Iran's nuclear programme supports the production of secret nuclear weapons. On Monday June 16th, at a gathering of foreign ministers in Luxembourg, Iran was asked to sign an additional international protocol "urgently and unconditionally" committing it not to make nuclear weapons, and to accept tougher United Nations inspections of nuclear sites. On the same day, in Vienna, the IAEA discussed a harsh report by the Director General, Mohammed al-Baradei, in which he said Tehran had "failed to report certain nuclear material and activities", but was making amends. He urged Iran to sign an additional protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty with the IAEA, granting its monitors wider access and more intrusive, short-notice inspections. However, the EU, Russia and the IAEA have called for tighter controls and more intrusive inspections on Iran's nuclear facilities but have stopped short of Washington's demand to declare Iran in material breach of international conventions. This is because both the EU and Russia have huge commercial interests in Iran. The EU is Iran's largest trading partner and Russia is responsible for building much of Iran's nuclear facilities. They know full well that by supporting American demands they will be providing America with the necessary pretext to achieve her vision of regime change. Speaking before the parliamentary foreign affairs committee the British Foreign Secretary said, "Sometimes friends disagree. We can have an honest disagreement about our approach to Iran with the USâ&#x20AC;Ś It is no part of the policy of Her Majesty's Government to seek regime change in Iran." The official British position is very close to the European position on Iran, which is to constructively engage with Iran. Speaking before the British Parliament, in early June, Blair said, "We have worked very long and hard to have a proper dialogue with the Iranian government." In fact, Britain's disagreement with America over changing regimes in the Middle East could not be more pronounced. In May, Britain intentionally

began leaking sensitive information which severely questioned the credibility of the intelligence used by the allies to justify their attack on Iraq. On May 29th an unnamed official told BBC Radio 4's Today programme how intelligence on Iraq's WMD (weapons of mass destruction) was manipulated by the government. He said, "Most people in intelligence weren't happy with the dossier because it didn't reflect the considered view they were putting forward. That information was not in the original draft. It was included in the dossier against our wishes because it wasn't reliable. Most things in the dossier were double-source but that was singlesource and we believe that the source was wrong." On May 31st, the Guardian newspaper published excerpts from a secret meeting that took place between British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and American Secretary of State Colin Powell at the Waldorf Hotel New York. In the brief exchange both men expressed serious reservations about the quality of intelligence on Iraq's WMD. They also expressed concerns about the claims made by their respective leaders. These leaks were not only meant to embarrass the US administration but were also intended to damage the credibility of the intelligence agencies and the subsequent use of this information to justify regime change. The timely release of the incriminating information coincided with the arguments put forward by Donald Rumsfeld the US Secretary of Defense, the neo-conservative and US lawmakers that the US should adopt a policy of regime change for Iran. For instance, on May the 25th the Washington Post summed up the mood in the US government by quoting an administration official "â&#x20AC;ŚMay 12 suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia, has suspended once-promising contacts with Iran and appears ready to embrace an aggressive policy of trying to destabilize the Iranian government." On May 26th, several US lawmakers announced that they now supported the policy to destabilise Iran. "It would be in the interest of the world and most particularly of the Iranian people to have a regime change in Iran", U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, a Democratic presidential hopeful, told Fox News. To substantiate their claims they drew heavily on intelligence reports gathered from the CIA. Furthermore, the intelligence leaks also overshadowed the G8 summit where the US was trying to convince its allies that Iran was producing secret nuclear bombs. Without doubt this will make it difficult for the Bush administration to justify to the world that regime change in Iran is necessary because Iran poses an imminent threat or that it has links with Al-Qaeda.

nuclear programme. Speaking after a meeting in Moscow, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said, ''Today they want to develop a nuclear weapon... This is not just a threat for Israel, this is a threat for the whole world.'' 2. A new loyal regime in Iran will go a long way towards ensuring that the Shia in the region can be placed under US control 3. America will gain control of the huge oil and gas reserves found in Iran. Iran's gas reserves are the second largest in the world after Russia. It also provides America with the unique opportunity to transport the oil of the Caspian Sea to Iranian oil terminals. This will inevitably lead to the destruction of OPEC and America will be able to exercise maximum control over the price of oil. 4. Opening up the Iranian market to US multinationals, who until now have been barred because of US sanctions It is true that the Muslims of Iran like Muslims of other countries are disenchanted with their governments who continuously put the interests of the Kuffar ahead of the Muslim Ummah. Since the revolution, the Muslims of Iran have witnessed the Iranian government's duplicity towards Islam. The Iranian government professes to be Islamic, while in practice it is nothing more than an autocratic secular state. The few laws of Islam that are implemented are designed to mollify the Islamic sentiments of the people. America has taken note of the disenchantment of the Muslims of Iran and has moved her agents amongst the reformists to direct the anger of the people towards targeting the removal of the regime. After which America will turn Iran into a secular republic led by pro-American reformists. The Muslims of Iran, like the Muslims of Iraq and Afghanistan before them, must reject American attempts to remake Iran into a protectorate of America. They must of their own accord remove the evil Iranian regime. The only way the Muslims of Iran can simultaneously remove the Iranian regime and protect themselves from American interference is to work for the re-establishment of the Khilafah state. The Khilafah state will be intellectually and politically independent of the West. Unlike the present government, she will never surrender her strategic assets or her resources to the enemies of Islam. z

As far as America is concerned, she will press on with the claims and look for opportunities to change the regime in Iran. This is because the Bush administration views Iran as a means of securing the following interests. 1. Preservation of Israel's security. By making Iran nuclear free, the threat of launching a nuclear strike on Israel is removed. Indeed, Israel has taken every opportunity to highlight the threat posed by Iran's July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

AN INTERVIEW WITH THE WIVES OF THE EGYPT 3

n the early hours of 1st April 2002, armed officers from the Egyptian State Security forced their way into the homes of hundreds of Muslims. The Egyptian State Security did not storm the homes to find 'terrorist material' or weapons; they were there to hunt down the carriers of the Haq, the sincere Da'wah carriers. They forced their way into the homes of these men, armed with hand guns, semi-automatic machineguns and grenades, ransacked their homes and in front of their families, in front of their children forcibly took arrested men to the torture chambers for interrogation. Amongst these men were three members of Hizb utTahrir from Britain; Maajid Nawaz, a student at SOAS university, Yahya Nisbet and Reza Pankhurst, both IT executives, all with young families. Whilst the muezzin was calling the Adhan for Fajr, calling to all that is good, calling to all that is right, these men were being blindfolded, handcuffed and thrown into the back of the State Security vans to be transported to a torture facility. The men were taken to the torture dungeons of Naser City, Cairo where they were subjected to appalling forms of torture. They were then held in solitary confinement, then punishment cells and 24

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

denied access to lawyers for 54 days.

of the many 'oppressed muslims'.

They were held without charge for five months after which the men were charged with the following:

Q1: What are the latest developments in the case of the 'Egypt 3'?

Promoting by speech and writing the goals of a group founded in violation of the provision of the law, which is called Hizb ut Tahrir.

Possessing printed literature.

Possessing a printing instrument i.e. a computer.

Humera: The trial of the 'Egypt 3', also involves 23 Egyptians and it is treated as one case. It has been fourteen months since the arrest and subsequent torture of my husband and the other men. It took five months to charge my husband and seven months to begin the trial proceedings. There have been numerous adjournments and on the 19th April 2003 there was a fourth lengthy adjournment to the case till 21st June 2003. We are currently waiting for the prosecution to sum up the case against our husbands and the other brothers.

Their trial started in October 2002 in the State Security Emergency Courts with 23 other men. All the men have reported to be tortured and one brother has lost use of some of his limbs from the torture that he was inflicted with. The trial has suffered lengthy delays whilst the prosecution put Islam on trial and decide what crime these men have actually committed. Fifteen months since their arrest there is no indication as to when this farcical trial will come to an end. Humera Ihsan, Hodan Pankhurst and Rabiah Nawaz (the wives of the arrested members of Hizb ut-Tahrir from Britain) have been interviewed by Khilafah Magazine to get an insight as to how the case is progressing and how they feel about becoming one

Q2: What charges have been made against your husband? Hodan: The charges brought against my husband are not related to violence of any sort. He is being charged with the following charges (extracted from the Indictment filed against him and the others): "1) Promoting by speech and writing the goals of a group founded in violation of the provision of the law, which is called Hizb ut-Tahrir… 2) Possessing printed literature…

an interview with the wives of the egypt 3

3) Possessing a printing instrument i.e. a computer…" From the charges alone it is clear that my husband and the others were arrested for carrying nothing more than thought…Islamic political thought. The charges carry a possibility of ten years imprisonment, and you have to ask yourself "For what?" …for carrying Islamic thought which Islam teaches us in the Qur'an and Sunnah. In fact during the trial, all the books that were taken from the homes of all the defendants have been declared "perfectly within the bounds of Islamic Shari'ah" by the Al-Azhar University Committee. Rabiah: My husband has been charged with propagating the ideas of Hizb ut-Tahrir and distributing literature regarding the ideas of Hizb utTahrir. My husband is a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir and went to Egypt in his capacity as a student of Arabic and Law. He was not involved in any violent activity, as this contradicts the method for the reestablishment of the Islamic state that Hizb ut-Tahrir has adopted from the Islamic texts. Hizb ut-Tahrir seeks to achieve its objective of the re-establishment of the Khilafah through peaceful and non-violent means. The actions of the member would include discussion regarding the Islamic concepts so as to revive them in the hearts and minds of this Ummah. My husband's activities were restricted to this. Humera: My husband was not involved with any violent activity. He went to Egypt to study the Arabic language at a college for Arabic sciences. He belongs to an Islamic political party that does not advocate violence, but change through intellectual and political means. Five months after his arrest and torture, he was charged with 'Promoting by speech and writing the goals of a group founded in violation of the provision of the law, which is called Hizb utTahrir…' Q3: We know of situations in prisons in the Muslim world such as Uzbekistan where the rights of prisoners are violated and they are made to reside in inhumane conditions and are often tortured. What is the condition of your husband in prison? Rabiah: After the arrest and subsequent torture of my husband, he found himself in a cell no larger than 6ft by 7ft. He was made to endure the punishment of solitary confinement even before a trial. He was not allowed to meet any other human beings for the whole day. Eventually he was permitted to leave his cell and meet 3 other inmates for 2 hours a day, leaving the other 22 hours of the day in solitary confinement. This time allocation to meet others slowly improved to 4 hours, then 6 hours. During the first 2 months of his detention he had no lights, no window and no bedding in his cell. It consisted of four walls, a hole in the roof and bare concrete floors upon which he was forced to sleep. The conditions have constantly changed, and today my husband finds himself sharing a small room with 19 other prisoners. The only room he has is to sleep. Egypt, like other oppressive regimes, uses the lengthy detention of da'wah carriers and their

conditions of imprisonment as a form of punishment and torture. They have treated my husband worse than an animal. They are transported to and from court in a van full of 50 people, when the van is designed to carry only 20. Hodan: On the 1st of April 2002, a year and two months ago State Security officers entered our home with machine guns in the early hours of the morning and forcibly arrested my husband without any reason or warrant. That night was the last time I saw my husband. I have since found out that straight after he was taken from our home, he was blindfolded and handcuffed behind his back continuously for many days. He was beaten regularly and barely fed filthy scraps of left over food. My husband was singled out to be gruesomely tortured with electric shocks, and on one occasion this was done to him because he was incapable of replying to an interrogator's question in the Arabic language. Others, the Egyptian detainees were treated far worse. Some were suspended from their wrists and ankles for 10 days or more. Some have even lost use of their limbs due to electric shock torture. My husband and the others were forced to listen to the incessant screams of helpless victims of the torture chambers. Many of them just pleading for mercy, being tortured in the most disgusting and shameless manner. Many of the families, wives and even children of detainees are brought into these places to be tortured alongside their family. It is shocking to think that a human being is capable of doing that to another human being for no reason other than [proclaiming] La ilaha illaAllah Muhammad Rasoolallah. Surely they are the ones who already have a disease in their hearts, and due to their disobedience to Allah, He (swt) compounds their disease for them. These are the ones who are subservient to the Kuffar - to the extent that they would hurt and abuse their own Muslim brothers to appease the enemies of Allah (swt). My husband continued to suffer in this way for many days. He, along with the others, were then taken to a prison and thrown into solitary confinement in a filthy cell, with concrete floors infested with rats and insects and no toilet access. They were to spend about 22 hours of the day like this only being allowed out to take a meal in the day. They were then moved into (individual) cells with toilet access after 7 months of being the way they were. Only recently they were moved again but this time into a communal and severely overcrowded cell with 20 of them sharing a very small place! Humera: My husband was beaten every hour, denied access to toilet facilities, deprived of sleep, blindfolded and handcuffed continuously for days on end; he was made to watch other Muslims being tortured in front of him. He spent the first days of his detention in a torture facility where he heard the screams of men being tortured in the most inhumane ways continuously for four days. He was then transferred to isolation cells, and then rat infested punishment cells for five months. By Allah's Mercy my husband is now safe from this in a prison where he shares the cell with 19 other

prisoners. However the threat of returning to the torture dungeons is always a possibility. There are 22 thousand 'political prisoners in Egypt' and torture is institutionalised. You ask are they taken care of? Allah (swt) is their protector, and Allah (swt) has showered them with his mercy - they are alive and their Iman is strong and untarnished by this oppression. Q5: How are your children/child coping with not having their father present? Humera: My son is three years old now and was parted from his father when he was two, He was very close to his Daddy and asks for his Daddy everyday, he says: ' When is daddy coming home? Why doesn't he come back?' He makes dua'a before going to bed that Allah (swt) unites him with his father soon. He is truly a blessing for me from Allah (swt), he dries my tears, reminds me that all will be ok and that 'Allah will help his daddy because Allah can do anything'. Rabiah: I have a two and a half-year-old son. He has always sensed the absence of his father even from the age of one when his father was arrested before his eyes. As my son matures, he has become even more aware of his 'Aboo'. He is looking for a father figure and spends a lot of time with my father or my husband's father and brother, enjoying their company. Alhamdulillah, Allah (swt) has given him much patience and company. Hodan: It is naturally hard on the heart of a mother when you have to tell your children everyday for over a year that their father will be coming home soon. They are quite young and do not know the full reality of what is happening. I have a daughter and a son who obviously need their father and adore their father - but it is my duty as their mother to work twice as hard now in ensuring that they remain in a healthy Islamic atmosphere. On a daily and practical level, I try my best to involve their father in their life by getting them to write to their father or even buying them presents on behalf of their father. These are practical steps I try to take to maintain the relationship my husband and our children have. Having said that, there are young children in Iraq and in Palestine [among other places] that have witnessed their fathers humiliated and killed in front of their eyes. There are those who are in a more difficult situation than ours. As a Muslim we should always try to look to those worse off than us and remember the Rahma of Allah (swt) rather than look to those in better circumstance than us. I pray to Allah (swt) that He will replace this unnatural situation of the Muslim Ummah with the natural solution of Islam as a way of life in the shade of the Khilafah. Q6: Do you and your children have any contact with your husband? Humera: Contact is very limited. We are able to send and receive letters. These are all screened both ways so nothing is private.

July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

an interview with the wives of the egypt 3

Q7: What has the stance of the British Government been regarding the case - have they been pressurising the Egyptian government to free the 'Egypt 3'? Rabiah: The British Government determines it policies towards cases in accordance with policy that it has towards the country concerned, in this case Egypt. Their policy towards different countries is determined by ideology that this government upholds, and this is capitalism. So the benefit that Britain will gain will be the sole criteria that it will use to determine its stance towards various cases. The British Government aims to maintain a good relationship with Egypt. This is because Egypt is a major player in the Middle East and Britain has many interests to fulfil, such as the economic and strategic interests that it has in this region. It is for this reason that it has not 'rocked the boat' in demanding the release of the 'Egypt three' even though it has been questioned by the Media in this regard. Their pressure has been in no way comparable to the pressure they put on the Saudi authorities to release the British nurses and the pressure applied on the Greek authorities for the acquittal of the 'plane spotters'. The agenda the West has is actually to encourage the arrest and imprisonment of the carriers of the da'wah. What can we expect from a government who bombs, destroys and loots our brothers and sisters in Iraq in the name of liberation? In fact many Muslims are even being arrested in the west under the guise of 'combating terrorism'. It seems that any Muslim who understands Islam as a way of life and realises the political nature of Islam is a target. Such Muslims are arrested without any reason and are kept for days for interrogation without any evidence against them. We would prefer to leave the 'Egypt three' in the hands of Allah (swt) and not for these oppressors to liberate them. Q9: What motivates you to carry on with the call to Islam knowing full well that your husband has been put in prison for carrying the same message? Humera: The Prophet (saw) said in a hadith:

"The people most prone to tests are the Prophets, then the most pious people, then the less pious, and so on". This for me is a test from my Rabb; I carry the da'wah as my duty as my fard and regardless of what test Allah (swt) has in store for me I will continue to the best of my ability Inshallah until the Haq prevails. You ask what motivates? What more does a Muslim need than to know what they carry is the truth and it 26

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

is a duty upon all Muslims to work for this state, it is an honour as it is like the work that the Sahabah (ra) carried. Fear and oppression has never stopped the believers from carrying the truth it only further strengthens my conviction and makes me realise that now I am part of the oppressed Ummah, oppression is at my doorstep and political change is needed urgently to stop this aggression. A Message to the Oppressed Women of the Ummah Before the 1st April 2002 I really sympathised with sisters whose husbands are political prisoners. After my husband was arrested, I of course empathised with sisters more since I share their reality now. As advice for sisters in this predicament I would say: My dear sisters, I would only advise you to have a lot of patience in the face of this painful oppression. Never give up the call yourselves or even become defeated. Our position is an honourable one. We are not the wives of murderers or thieves; we are the wives of honourable, noble men who obey Allah (swt) in all that they do. Your husband needs you to be strong in your Iman, as do your children, and the rest of your family. Your companionship to your husband does not end when he is taken from you - rather it is solidified. You are the woman he has entrusted to take care of his children, of his wealth, of his honour. You are his friend, his helper and his peace of mind, if you are strong then he is stronger but if you are weak, he will become weak and suffer. Link your trust to Allah (swt) and have conviction that the one who strives in the cause of Allah (swt) today will recline in Jannah with her husband forever enjoying the rewards of Allah (swt). May Allah (swt) make you my dear sisters of the dwellers of Paradise. I hope to get there with my husband and my family - and if Allah (swt) accepts my humble efforts and rewards from me for the patience I try to have, then perhaps I will meet with you there Inshallah Ta'ala. My dear sisters these husbands we have are a gift from Allah (swt) and an enjoyment for a time, what better sacrifice to make for Allah (swt) than sacrificing our time with them for Allah's (swt) sake, in pursuit of Allah's (swt) pleasure, to make Allah's (swt) word the highest on this Earth. The rewards that Allah (swt) has for the sincere believer who remains patient in these times of oppression is no comparison to the luxuries of this life, they will be far greater than we can imagine. Remain patiently for Allah's (swt) help and mercy and remember we have lost nothing by losing time with our husbands; we have only gained if we gained Allah's (swt) pleasure. For my dear sisters in the da'wah who have not been tested with this sacrifice, prepare yourselves by strengthening your relationship with Allah (swt), for it is this relationship you will need when inflicted with any of Allah's (swt) tests. And for those of us

who carry the da'wah the tests are part of the work to re-establish Allah's (swt) Deen on this Earth, we must expect that we will be the ones who make the greatest sacrifices like those of the noble Sahabah (ra) before us. I pray that this oppression comes to an end and we are protected under the shade of Islam soon. z

TREATIES IN ISLAM ASI F KH A N

reaties play a vital role in international politics. They are contractual agreements between two or more states that regulate some aspects of their relations. Muslims for the past 100 years or so have been subjected to the most humiliating treaties that have maintained the dominance of the Kuffar over the believers. Treaties like the Sykes-Picot agreement, made up between the British and French imperialists, agreeing to carve away the lands of the Middle East, from the Uthmani Khilafah. They have been used to recognise the state of Israel. In 1979, the Egyptian regime signed a peace treaty with Israel recognising the usurpation of the land of Palestine. In 1993, the western imposed Palestine Liberation Organisation signed an interim peace treaty with Israel. A year later following these pacts, Jordan's monarch signed a peace treaty with Israel. Also we have seen that Kashmir has been in the spotlight for another treaty that would carve it away and give it to the BJP government of India. Other types of treaties which this Ummah has been subject to result in economic and cultural colonisation. Post September 11th alliances with the US have also been formed resulting in military colonisation. She has scattered her bases throughout the Muslim lands, with the agreement of the rulers.

that he heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say

"The Imam is a guardian and he is responsible over his subjects." This means that all the matters related to the management of the citizens' affairs is the responsibility of the Khalifah.

which Allah has shown you, so be not an advocate for the treacherous." [TMQ An-Nisa: 105]

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE KHALIFAH As mentioned previously, treaties are a means to regulate the relationship between two or more States. Allah (swt) has shown the Muslims, the basis for the relationship, between the Khilafah State and other States, is one of the Islamic da'wah. Allah (swt) says:

These are but some of the treaties that the Muslims have been subjected to. The Muslims throughout the world are still feeling the agonising consequences of them. It is imperative thus for the Muslims to have an overview of the Islamic rules governing treaties, as they have such a major impact on their lives. We need to view the issue of treaties from the perspective of the Shari'ah. z

"Surely, We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, that you might judge between men by that

In the treaties which the Shari'ah has allowed, the command of contracting or not contracting them is left to the Khalifah's opinion and ijtihad because the Khalifah is appointed as the guardian and this means firstly protecting the Muslims' strength.

TREATIES FALL UNDER THE RULE OF CONTRACTS The Islamic Shari'ah considers international treaties to be a special section of contracts since they are nothing but a contractual agreement between two or more States that regulates some aspects of their relations. Islam defines an international treaty as a temporary agreement between the Islamic State and other states to regulate a lawful aspect of their relations. The Shari'ah explains the principles and conditions applicable to this relationship. The books of Islamic jurisprudence are full with detailed rules regarding treaties. Therefore, for the most part, the standard regulation of contracts applies to international treaties.

"He it is Who has sent His Messenger with the Guidance and the Deen of Truth, that He may make it (Islam) superior over all religions. And Allah suffices as a Witness." [TMQ Al-Fath: 28]

The texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah prove that Islam permits the establishment of international treaties. Allah (swt) says in the Qur'an:

Allah (swt) through his Divine wisdom has given the task of implementing the foreign policy to the Khalifah of the Muslims alone or to those who have been delegated by him. In the hadith narrated by Ahmad and Al-Bukhari from Abdullah bin 'Umar

â&#x20AC;&#x153;If they incline to cease fighting, accept that from July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

treaties in islam

them and put your faith in Allah." [TMQ Al-Anfal: 61]

â&#x20AC;&#x153;If they (Muslims outside the Islamic State) seek your support, then lend them your support, save against those nations you have a treaty with.â&#x20AC;? [TMQ Al-Anfal: 72] The actions of man take place in the reality. The speech of the Legislator (As-Shari) has come to clarify these rules and it has provided the things that are required. It is on these matters that the realisation and completion of the hukm depends, i.e. it has been legislated because of what the Hukm Shar'i necessitates. This is the Khitaab Al Wad (declaratory address) and relates to what the hukm necessitates. When we look to contracts, they are considered either to be: Sahih (Sound) A contract that fulfils all of the arkaan (rules) and the shuroot (conditions) and has full effect in the Shari'ah Baatil (Void) A contract that has failed to fulfil specific arkaan or vital shuroot. A contract that is baatil is the opposite of one that is sahih and has no legal effect at all. An example of this would be if a man married a woman who was already married to someone else at the time. Faasid (Defective) This is a contract that fails to fulfil some of the shuroot, but not the arkaan. With the Faasid in essence it is in agreement with the order of the Shari'ah but its attribute (wasf) which does not violate the essence contradicts the order of the Shari'ah and hence the irregularity goes when its cause goes. So for example a town dweller's sale to a Bedouin is faasid because the Bedouin does not know the price. If the ignorance were removed then the sale would be sahih.

TREATIES THAT THE KHALIFAH CAN AGREE ON The Islamic State may contract treaties of peace, truce, good neighbourliness, cultural treaties, commercial and financial treaties and treaties similar to those which the interests of the Islamic Da'wah require, according to the conditions consented to by Islam. If these treaties include conditions not consented to by Islam, those conditions that are not correct in Islam are void and the rest of the treaty remains executable in the remaining conditions. If there arose between the Islamic State and her enemy a situation of war, it is allowed for her to contract a truce and peace treaty with her according to what the objective requires at that time and what the interests of the da'wah require. If the Islamic State views that she should make peace and friendship with a neighbouring State or a State remote from her for a matter required by the 28

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

interests of the da'wah, it is allowed for her to do this.

2) The primary conditions of the treaty (the absence of any of these conditions nullifies the treaty)

The state may find in a treaty with the disbelievers a tool for the Da'wah to reach them and to create a public opinion about Islam amongst them. There could also be the repelling of great evil in a treaty or being able to reach another enemy. Therefore it is allowed for the Islamic State to contract good neighbourly treaties with neighbouring states just like it is allowed to contract non-aggression treaties with non-neighbouring States for a specific period, if it sees in that a way for the Islamic Da'wah, protection for the Muslims or any other benefit for Islam or the Muslims.

a) - The parties to the agreement should have the authority to resolve and regulate the subject matter of the treaty. Therefore, the Islamic State cannot agree with another state to annex a region unless that state controlled the region under consideration. An unauthorized individual cannot enter a treaty on behalf of his state (e.g., Arafat and his Palestinian Authority were not authorized to represent the Ummah or enter a treaty with Israel, so whatever they agreed upon is null and void).

The Messenger (saw) did make a treaty with Banu Mudlij and Banu Dumrah to make safe the roads his army travelled upon and he made a treaty with Yuhanna bin Rub'ah in Tabuk to make safe the boundaries of the State in the direction of Rome and in the boundaries of Bilad as-Sham.

TREATIES WITH TYRANT RULERS ARE FORBIDDEN If a ruler of the people of war seek a covenant from Muslims on condition he be left to rule in his land and he continues with his killing, torture or anything else which is not suitable in Dar al-Islam, the agreement is rejected and no response is given to him as this is considered as consenting to the oppression of the people and every attempt should be made to prevent it. This is in stark comparison, with the US that finds it of no consequence to make agreements with tyrants, such as Karimov, who make these agreements as a cover to continue their oppression.

RULES PERTAINING TO TREATIES Treaties have to satisfy specific legal conditions for them to be considered valid. There are three kinds of conditions: 1) The key components of the treaty (the absence of any of these conditions renders the treaty null and void as is the case in any regular contract) a) - The parties to the treaty (two or more

b) - The agreement should be the result of free will, untainted by cheating (e.g. false maps) or duress. The only exception being ceasefire agreements that by definition contain an element of duress but is valid nevertheless. c) - The subject matter of the treaty must be existent and legal. It is haram to regulate the trade of a Haram matter, for example khamr (intoxicants) d) - Other primary conditions of regular contracts such as the existence of a mutual and simultaneous agreement to the treaty.

3) The secondary conditions of the treaty (the absence of any of these conditions can but does not necessarily void the treaty) a) - No treaty can be established with another state that is in a state of war with the Muslims, other than a ceasefire treaty. A treaty implies the sanctity of life and property of the state's citizens, that is, the state that the Khilafah is at war with. This is in contradiction to the laws of war that would be in effect. However, following the materialization of a ceasefire treaty, other kinds of treaties can be established with that State. b) - A new treaty cannot contradict an already established treaty. The State has a duty to honour its obligations under existing treaties. Entering new treaties, which undermine existing treaties, would constitute reneging on an obligation, which is Haram. Allah (swt) says

states)

b) - The subject matter of the treaty - (e.g. regulation of commerce, ceasefire) c) - The text of the treaty. - (e.g. in the treaty of Hudaybiyah, the parties to the treaty were the Islamic State and the state of Quraish; the subject matter was a ceasefire for 10 years etc. and the text was ratified by the statement: "This is what Muhammad bin 'Abdullah agreed upon with Suheil bin Amir ...")

"And honour your obligations towards me, so I would honour my obligations towards you and fear none but me." [TMQ Al Baqarah: 40] and

"O you who believe, honour your contracts." [TMQ Al Ma'idah : 1] Any such treaty is void.

Thus, a treaty where the subject matter does not exist at the time of ratifying it is void.

c) - The text of the treaty must be detailed enough to alleviate any anticipated disagreements on the

treaties in islam

subject matter. Therefore, treaties cannot be equivocal. Allah (swt) says "Jihad continues until the Day of Judgment."

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Do not use your oaths as a way to deceive each other.â&#x20AC;? [TMQ An-Nahl: 94] This does not mean that the State is allowed to engage in manoeuvring. The State can manoeuvre but must not use bogus treaties as a tool in these manoeuvres. d) - The treaty should satisfy a specific objective in the State's foreign policy. It should advance the goal of Islam's foreign policy i.e. carrying the Islamic Da'wah. The Ummah has the right to take the Khalifah to task in demonstrating how a treaty satisfies this condition. If the treaty is not designed to meet foreign policy goals, the treaty is annulled. It is notable how the peace treaties signed by our treacherous rulers today, do not achieve in any conceivable way these objectives. e) - The treaty cannot include any illegal terms. Should Muslims accept any such condition under duress they have to renounce it as soon as they can. Otherwise, the condition is disregarded but the rest of the treaty remains in force. f) - Treaties should be written in Arabic, as Arabic is the State's medium of expression, instruction and correspondence. Rasoolallah (saw) used Arabic in his letters to other heads of States who were not versed in Arabic. The fact that he (saw) did so, while there was a need to use other languages, proves that the Arabic language is the language of the Islamic State and must be used in the conduct of official State business. Violating this condition does not void the treaty, since it has no bearing on the textual substance and objectives of the treaty per se, but it is Haram for those individuals responsible for the violation. This condition can only be waived under imperative situations.

The following are some treaties that are Haram and the Muslims cannot be privy to or part of them and should they exist they would automatically be null and void: 1 - Treaties establishing permanent borders for the Islamic State. These treaties either allow for the existence of more than one Muslim state (if Islam is being applied on both sides of the borders) or limits Jihad (if Kuffar and Islam share these borders) Rasoolallah (saw) said:

"If two Khalifah's are given allegiance then kill the second of them." [Muslim] Therefore, the Muslims cannot have more than one ruler and one State. On the other hand, Allah (swt) says:

"Fight those Kafireen who reside on your borders." [TMQ At-Taubah: 123] No ideology can recognise borders. An ideology is dynamic in its existence, as opposed to static and it either expands or shrinks. 2 - Military alliances (Al-Ahlaf al Askariyya) are forbidden - Null and Void.

g) In addition, the treaty must have a time limit. Imam Tabari reports the consensus of scholars on this matter in his book "Al Jihad" page 14. Permanent treaties and semi-permanent treaties (treaties for exceedingly long time intervals, e.g. 99 years) are haram. Allah (swt) says:

Military alliances are the alliances contracted between two or more states which make their armies fight together with a common enemy, like NATO, or make military information and intelligence or war tools exchangeable between them or if one of them enters into war they will consult for the other to enter war together, with it or not according to the interests they see. All of these alliances, whether they were dual or collective or other than that, necessitate that the army fights with its ally to protect it and its entity, whether there were numerous leaders or a single leader.

"Allah and his Messenger (saw) renounce those Mushrikeen you had treaties with. So (grant them) a four-month grace period." [TMQ At-Taubah: 2]

These alliances are void from their basis. So the Ummah is not obliged with them even if the Muslims' Khalifah contracted them as it contradicts the Shari'ah since it would make the Muslim fight under a Kuffar authority and under a Kufr banner and makes him fight in order to preserve a Kufr entity; all this is Haram.

This was in reference to those kafireen with whom the Muslims had open-ended treaties. This verse nullifies these kinds of treaties. Furthermore, the lack of a specific time frame for a treaty rules out the conduct of Jihad in the territory covered by this treaty. However, Rasoolallah (saw) said:

It is not allowed for a Muslim to fight except under Muslim leadership and under the Islamic banner. There came a prohibition in the Sahih hadith against fighting under the disbelievers' banner and their

authority or leadership. Ahmad and An-Nisa'i narrated from Anas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Do not seek light with the fire of polytheists" i.e. do not make the polytheists' fire a light for you. The fire is a metonym (kinaya) for war; it is said the "fire of war was kindled" (awqada nar) i.e. its evil and violent passion/excitement was called into existence. And the fire of fright (tahweel) is a fire the Arabs in Jahilliyah would kindle during alliance. The hadith alludes to war with polytheists and adopting their banner, so the prohibition of war together with polytheists is understood from it. Imam As-Sarakhsi said in 'Al-Mabsut' in the book of 'Siyar': "From the hadith of Adh-Dhahabi (RA) 'that the Messenger of Allah (saw) went out on the day of Uhud where there was a husna squadron or he said khushna. So he said: 'Who are these?' They said: 'The Jews so and so.' So he said: 'We do not seek assistance of disbelievers.' Its interpretation is that they were powerful in themselves not fighting under the Muslims' banner. For us, we only seek assistance from them if they were fighting under the Muslims' banner whereas if they come isolated with their own banner then we do not seek assistance from them. This is the interpretation of what was narrated of the Prophet (saw) said: 'Do not seek light from the fire of the polytheists' narrated by Ahmad and An-Nisa'i via the way of Anas and he said: 'I am free (bariu) from every Muslim who fights together with a polytheist' meaning if the Muslim is under the polytheists' banner." From this it became clear that military alliances with disbelieving states are haram in the Shari'ah so it is not contracted. It is not allowed for the Muslim to shed his blood in the way of defending the belligerent disbeliever. 3 - Treaties on leasing or giving access to naval ports, air force bases and military roads to Kuffar armies. Allah (swt) says:

"Allah will never grant the Kuffar authority over Muslims." [TMQ An-Nisa: 141] Such treaties give the Kuffar authority over Muslim lands and a share of authority over Muslims. This is the new face of colonialism and is Haram. TRUCE (AL-HUDNA) The truce treaty between Muslims and disbelievers is permitted due to the truce of the Prophet (saw) with the Quraish at Hudaybiyah. However the permissibility of a truce is restricted to the existence of an advantage for the foreign policy or spreading of the Da'wah. This is because news reached the Messenger of Allah (saw) before he travelled to Hudaybiyah that an accord existed between the people of Khaybar July 2003 Khilafah Magazine

treaties in islam

and Makkah aimed at invading the Muslims. He hastened directly upon his return from Hudaybiyah to invade Khaybar and similarly accelerated the sending of messengers to the kings and leaders inviting them to Islam, which indicates that, the truce of Hudaybiyah was for a benefit related to spreading the Da'wah.

At-Taubah: 7] Also He (swt) said:

"And if you fear treachery from a people, then throw back upon them on equal terms" [TMQ Al-Anfal: 58]

TIME LIMIT FOR THE TRUCE If the benefit in a truce treaty is verified, it must be measured for a specified and known period. No truce is allowed without a time period, as if it did not have one, this would be the suspension of the Da'wah to Islam, indefinitely and also the Hudaybiyah truce had a specific period measured for it, which we are thus obliged to follow.

THINGS THAT INVALIDATE A TRUCE

and He (swt) said:

iii) iv) v)

its period is concluded the other State violates it by nullifying it by their saying so clearly the other State violates it by fighting the Khilafah State the other State violates it by killing a Muslim or dhimmi something is done contradicting the conditions of the truce

It is allowed under these circumstances to recommence the foreign policy of the State and surprise action against the enemy state is permitted. This is because when the Messenger (saw) came to a truce with the Quraish and they broke their truce, it became permissible for the Islamic State to ignore the conditions of the truce that they agreed upon and he (saw) conquered Makkah. Also Allah (swt) mentions this is the Qur'an:

"As long as they stand firm upon it in relation to you, then stand firm upon it in relation to them" [TMQ

Please address your letters and questions to the Editorial Team, either by email or post at the following addresses: email: magazine@1924.org or write to: Khilafah Magazine Suite 298, 56 Gloucester Road London, SW7 4UB

Published by Khilafah Publications

Khilafah Magazine July 2003

"The worst beast before Allah are those who disbelieve and they do not believe. Those whom you made a treaty with then they violate their treaty every time and they do not fear. If you gain mastery over them in war, then punish them severely in order to disperse those behind them so that they may remember!" [TMQ Al-Anfal: 56-57]

"If they break their oaths after their promise and defame your Deen, fight the leaders of disbelief. Verily there is no oath for them so that they desist" [TMQ At-Taubah: 12 ]

It is clear from this that the fulfilment of treaties is an obligatory matter. If the treaty is for a specific period, it is obligatory to fulfil it until its end period; when its period is completed it is allowed not to renew it.

ANNULLING TREATIES

Accordingly the Legislator (As-Shari) has determined the types of international treaties and determined the situations that nullify the treaties. It is obliged to be bound with what the Legislator alone has shown regarding treaties and stop at the limit He (swt) sets and letting the Khalifah choose when and where to use them according to his opinion and Ijtihad. z

If the truce is contracted and it is valid, it is obliged upon us to observe the truce treaty until: i) ii)

hard strike so as to be a lesson and warning for others so that they too do not become bold against the Muslims in a similar situation. Allah (swt) said:

All treaties signed by the Islamic State must be limited to a specific period. However, contracting a treaty does not mean compelling Muslims with it in all situations just as it does not mean betrayal and violation of the treaty. Rather it is allowed to annul the treaty in specific situations stated by the Shari'ah and it is not allowed to annul it in other than the situations the Shari'ah stated. Before annulling the treaty the Khalifah must announce to the other state that the treaty has been broken. The situations for which the Shari'ah stated the permissibility of annulling the treaty with the enemy are: Firstly: If the state with the treaty (mu'ahid) assists any enemy of the Muslims and supports him against the Muslims. Secondly: The mu'ahid violates one or more of the conditions of the treaty, which is similar to what occurred to the Messenger (saw) in the truce of Hudaybiyah. Thirdly: If treachery and betrayal is feared from the mu'ahid, nullifying the treaty is allowed. Allah (swt) said:

"If you fear treachery from any people, throw back (their covenant) to them on equal terms. Certainly Allah likes not the treacherous." [TMQ Al-Anfal: 58] In this situation it is obliged to inform the enemy and nullify the treaty with him. Fourthly: If the mu'ahid completely violates the treaty with the Islamic State by attacking the Khilafah State. In this situation it is obliged to nullify the treaty with them and strike them with a