Posted on 07/23/2002 10:35:05 AM PDT by knighthawk
Militant Islam is on the ascendant almost everywhere around the globe -- except in the country that experienced it longest and knows it best. In Iran, it is on the defensive and perhaps in retreat. This situation has vast potential consequences.
It derives from the fact that (putting aside the exceptional case of Saudi Arabia) militant Islam first attained power in Iran in 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini overthrew the Shah. Twenty-three years later, Khomeini's aggressive, totalitarian project has left Iranians deeply disillusioned and longing for a return to normal life.
The population wants freedom from a regime that bullies them personally, tyrannizes them politically, depresses them economically and isolates them culturally. As in Afghanistan under the Taliban, suffering the ravages of militant Islam means Iranians now "know evil when they see it up close," as Rob Sobhani of Georgetown University notes.
On an almost daily basis, Iranians manifest their wish to be free by skirmishing in newspapers, student dormitories, football stadiums, and elsewhere. Most remarkably, disillusion has reached the ruling elite itself, as manifested earlier this month in a scathing letter of resignation published by Ayatollah Jalaleddin Taheri. This nearly 90-year-old stalwart of the establishment who had a part in overthrowing the Shah, who helped establish the regime's intolerance, and who occupied the position of Friday prayer leader (roughly equivalent to a bishop) in the historic city of Isfahan -- just had enough.
He resigned because, as he poetically put it, he saw "the flowers of virtue being crushed and values and spirituality on the decline" by those who "sharpen the teeth of the crocodile of power." More specifically, he found the Islamic Republic spawned "crookedness, negligence, weakness, poverty and indigence."
Taheri's resignation was timed to coincide with large anti-regime demonstrations which lead to the arrest of more than 140 protesters. He then won the endorsement of nearly half of the deputies in Iran's parliament.
These and other indications of support prompted a highly unusual statement from U.S. President George W. Bush advising that Iran's "government should listen" to its people. This declaration in turn nearly panicked the government, which then compelled Taheri to issue another statement, somewhat softening his critique.
All this has several implications.
- Iran's future: As a rule of thumb, when the apple of a regime's eye turns against it, the government is vulnerable. Taheri's rejection of the Islamic Republic is roughly analogous to the situation in Poland two decades ago, when the workers of that supposed "worker's paradise" rejected the communist state that claimed to benefit them.
The Islamic Republic is not near collapse, for the rulers are ready to kill as many Iranians as it takes to keep power. Still, that much of the population -- and even some of the leadership -- despises the current authority means that regime change is just a matter of time.
- Democracy: By virtue of getting more or less what they wanted in 1979 (i.e. no Shah), the Iranian population realized it had control over and responsibility over its destiny. This development, unknown among Arabic-speaking populations, has led to something quite profound and wondrous: a maturation of the Iranian body politic. It has looked at its choices and thumpingly comes down in favour of democracy and a cautious foreign policy.
The contrast between the maturity of Iranian politics and the puerile quality of Arab politics could hardly be greater. Yes, both are dominated by tyrannical regimes, but Iranians can see their way out of the darkness. It is conceivable that before too long, the apparently disastrous Iranian revolution of 1978-79 will be looked back on as the inadvertent start of something wholesome and necessary.
- Islam: Iranians have apparently begun a process of seriously thinking about Islam of the sort that must precede that religion's developing into a moderate and anti-militant influence. Only Muslims who have suffered from the full debilitation inflicted by militant Islam over a period of decades, it seems, are immune to the charms of this totalitarianism and prepared to take on the challenge of finding an alternative vision to it.
In all, Iran finds itself in the wholly unaccustomed role of providing glimmers of good news to the outside world. The militant Islamic nightmare is far from over, but in that country, at least, the end is in sight.
Dear Mr. Pipes:
What other kind of Islam is there?
Medina Suras
The Chapter of Women
[Chapters from the Koran]
The Harvard Classics 1909–14But if there befalls you grace from God, he would say—as though there were no friendship between you and him—‘O would that I had been with thee to attain this mighty happiness!’ Let those then fight in God’s way who sell this life of the world for the next; and whoso fights in God’s way, then, be he killed or be he victorious, we will give him a mighty hire.
What ails you that ye do not fight in God’s way, and for the weak men and women and children, who say, ‘Lord, bring us out of this town 19 of oppressive folk, and make for us from Thee a patron, and make for us from Thee a help?’
Those who believe fight in the way of God; and those who disbelieve fight in the way of Tâghût; fight ye then against the friends of Satan, verily, Satan’s tricks are weak.
Do ye not see those to whom it is said, ‘Restrain your hands, and be steadfast in prayer and give alms;’ and when it is prescribed for them to fight then a band of them fear men, as though it were the fear of God or a still stronger fear, and they say, ‘O our Lord! why hast thou prescribed for us to fight, couldst thou not let us abide till our near appointed time?’ Say, ‘The enjoyment of this world is but slight, and the next is better for him who fears;’—but they shall not be wronged a straw.
... Why are ye two parties about the hypocrites, when God hath overturned them for what they earned? Do ye wish to guide those whom God hath led astray? Whoso God hath led astray ye shall not surely find for him a path. They would fain that ye misbelieve as they misbelieve, that ye might be alike; take ye not patrons from among them until they too flee in God’s way; but if they turn their backs, then seize them and kill them wheresoever ye find them, and take from them neither patron nor help,—save those who reach a people betwixt whom and you is an alliance—or who come to you while their bosoms prevent them from fighting you or fighting their own people. But had God pleased He would have given you dominion over them, and they would surely have fought you. But if they retire from you and do not fight you, and offer you peace,—then God hath given you no way against them.
Ye will find others who seek for quarter from you, and quarter from their own people; whenever they return to sedition they shall be overturned therein: but if they retire not from you, nor offer you peace, nor restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wheresoever ye find them;—over these we have made for you manifest power.
This sentence alone perfectly describes the 25+ Muslim run countries around the world.
A Tortured Schism Emerging Between Power Blocs, Military And Civil Sector In Iran
Source: Defense and Foreign Affairs Daily; Published: July 22, 2002;
Author: Analysis. From GIS (Global Information System) Station, Tehran
That is precisely as long as its predecessor maintained power. Even now the Islamic Republic is having to use foreign religious police to patrol the demonstrations. But the point at which the Shah's government failed was not when it lost its will to kill Iranians, but when it discovered that it couldn't kill enough of them to matter. It may take awhile before the Islamic Republic reaches that point.
I think that blanket condemnations of Islam per se are inappropriate here - you can, in fact, run a secular government under Islam, Turkey manages it nicely. To state from an incomplete theoretical understanding of the religion that there is no possibility of this is to ignore the actuality.
Is it just a coincidence that the US hasn't meddled in Iranian politics for 23 years either? LOL! Beware the blowback!
Oh, of course. I forgot how the streets of America are filled with cheering mobs when some ?Christian? Klan member puts a burning cross on a black person's lawn, or some ?Christian? skinhead attacks some homo. Right, gottcha.
Bingo! We have a winner!
Good, succinct explanation of the myth of "moderate Islam".
When the Soviets shot down Flight 007 in 1983, they began to rapidly decline morally and militarily. Chernobyl helped that along. Reagan accelerated the inevitable demise of the Soviet Union which allowed freedom to gain a foothold in Eastern Europe.
Osama Bin Laden has with 4 planes started a similar set of events. George W. Bush will seize on the chance to change the world forever and free the oppressed Islamic states around the world, but primarily in the Middle east!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.