Rehmat’s World (http://rehmat1.wordpress.com)
Defining “Political Islam” in Malaysia, 7 July 2009
Since the establishment of first City Islamic State of Medinnah in the 620s – the corrupt western elites, both religious and political, have considered Islam as a great threat to their Establishment – because Islam makes both politics and military defense (Jihad) as part of Islamic fundamentals. Interestingly, the Church played the role of king-maker and commissioning blood-thirsty Franks and Crusaders to Muslim and Christian lands outside Europe for over sixteen centuries.
Currently, the anti-Muslim crusade is run by the western greed for natural resources within Muslim-majority countries and the pro-Israel politicians, authors, Islamophobe intellectuals, mainstream media, Zionist/Jewish think tanks, and Zionist-mafia running faked Muslim websites on internet. All these activities are funded through tens of millions of dollars spent each year to change the face of Islam in the image of western-style Judeo-Christianity. One of the favourite sport of these professional propaganda idiots – is to divide Muslim politicians and intellectuals into being “extremist”, “moderate”, “liberal”, “conservative” or “reformist”. These ‘classification’ has nothing to do with ones’ religious belief or how he perform his/her Islamic rituals – but whether he/she believe that both politics and Jihad is as much part of Islam as daily prayers, zakat, fasting, and annual Hajj. For example, Ayatullah Rafsanjani, Ayatullah Khatami, Moussavi and Ahmadinejad – all have impeccable Islamic credentials – but for the pro-Israel groups, the first three individuals are “Reformists” and Ahmadinejad as “conservative”. The first three individuals represent the rich (Bazaris) and the upper-class (fancied by the part of western immoral culture) structure of Iranian society. Contrary to that Ahmadinejad is more popular among the lower-middle-class and poor classes of Iranian society.
Currently, a similar “Islamic category” card is being played in Malaysia by the mainstream media against country’s second largest political party with ‘Islamic credentials’ – the Pan Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS). PAS (est. 1956) is part of three-party opposition led by Anwar Ibrahim, a former member of PAS who left the party in 1982 and joined the ruling United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and was rewarded as country’s deputy prime minister before being sacked and imprisoned for immoral behaviour by Mahathir Mohammad, the prime minister. Since his release from jail – his “reformed” thinking has got him praise of some prominent western “intellectuals”. For example, professor John Esposito, the Saudi-funded “Orientalist” listed Anwar as one of the top nine makers of contemporary Islam, both as an activist and intellectual – while the dual citizen Israeli-mole, Wolfowitz considers Ibrahim a good friend. Tony Parkinson, international editor of ‘The Age’ also praised Anwar’s views of “moderate Islam” (i.e. Muslims accepting blame for 9/11 and helping to fight Al-Qaeda, and terrorism) in his March 28, 2005 article while condeming the “extremist” interpretation of Islam by Imam Hasan al-Banna, Imam Khomeini, Sayyid Qutb, Sayyid Maududi, Abdullah Azzam, Hamas, and Hizb’Allah: “No thanks to Jemaah Islamia, the policy of engagement with political Islam runs up against the undercurrent of fear and scepticism, some of it entirely justified, about whether to set beliefs which, in its most extreme form, denise the legitimacy of man-made law, can ever live along side democracy?”
PAS is not the political party which could be tolerated by the western Islamophobe – because of its support for Bosnian Muslims against Serbs, Palestinians against Zionist Jews, Lebanese against Zionist regime, and its support for Taliban against American invasion. Anwar Ibrahim’s appointment as a visiting scholar at Johns Hopkins University in March 2005 did raise some Zionist eye-brows for his past “extremist” views – based on his picture with Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi posted on Anwar’s website. “Yusuf Qaradawi, a leading Islamist scholar who is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and supports HAMAS, and who recently issued a fatwa calling for the Islamic conquest of Europe,” – lamented Ilan Weinglass in his article published in FrontPage magazine, January 12, 2006. However, Ilan do like Islamic parties like the ruling AKP party in Turkey, which in his Zionist logic is “moderate” because it has “friendly bonds” with Israel, the West.
Abdar Rahman Koya, is a freelance writer from Malaysia. In his latest article titled Rift in PAS as theories abound over conservatives and liberals wrote:
What started as a media manufactured rift in Malaysia’s Islamic Party (PAS) soon became real after its top leader openly condemned a section of the leadership who has been in talks with the ruling UMNO.
The rift was supposed to have started in the weeks leading to PAS’s general assembly last month. Both the mainstream and opposition media were indulging in that usual and now-familiar analysis of contemporary Islamic political entities: imaginary divisions between “conservatives” and “liberals”. The outcome is that those lumped in the “liberal” category started believing that they were popular, only to find that their “conservative” brethren are far more liked by the younger generation who are often mistaken for seeking to challenge the “conservatives”.
The deluge of ‘expert’ analyses of a ‘rift’ in PAS reached its peak as elections were held for its top positions. Most of the news reports are based on self-styled “PAS experts” whose understanding of Islamic politics and Islamic movement is shallow. Yet they have succeeded in convincing most people that PAS, not unlike other Islamic organisations subjected to “expert” analyses, is locked in a power struggle between the “ulama” and “liberal” factions. The former in this case are represented by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang on one side, and the so-called liberals led by what they describe as “younger” party leaders who want closer cooperation with other opposition parties. In the weeks that passed however, it became clear who the “liberals” were: those who display their vehement hatred of UMNO. Ironic as it seems, this faction is called the ‘moderates’.
But a quick check would reveal that the experts’ formula for analysing the debate within PAS (as with other Islamic movements) is far from scientific…..
If a “unity government” does indeed come into existence, its short lifetime is a foregone conclusion. It will not be the first time that PAS joins UMNO in a coalition government, only to break away after differences over issues such as Islam and policies related to it. Even Mahathir, who recently got a shot in the arm and started appearing more often in public after Abdullah’s departure, acknowledges this fact, saying that a unity government consisting of PAS and UMNO would not work.
In Malaysia’s highly racialised politics, a unity government will spell the end of multiracial governance, the battle cry of Anwar’s opposition coalition which earned it the support of voters of all stripes. There will be a dangerous dichotomy of Muslim-Malays only as the governing race on one hand, and the non-Muslim dominated opposition on the other. In a multi-religious Muslim country, this can have a destructive effect, especially if the non-Muslim opposition takes their grievances to foreign powers or gets financial backing to wrest power “democratically”, such as what has been happening in Nigeria and Lebanon.
In the long term, the bigger loser, needless to say, would be Anwar. Already grappling with yet another sodomy allegation with badly-plotted evidence reminiscent of a decade ago, any recognition by PAS of UMNO means his road to prime ministership will be rife with even bigger hurdles than the ones he managed to clear so far…..
(End)
