Iran

The New Islamic Republic of Iraq

Posted on by treasureofbaghdad

Iraq has officially become like Iran and Saudi Arabia. It is now a country that bans music, theater and alcohol, a country that I can call the New Islamic Republic of Iraq.
What a tragedy! Why don’t they call it “banning life”?
Is that art?!
Last week, the Iraqi government shut down social clubs that serve alcohol in Baghdad, enraging the educated class who demonstrated against the extreme Islamic-inspired order. Today, Iraqis woke up to hear a far worse order; the Iraqi Ministry of Education has banned theater and music classes in Baghdad’s Fine Arts Institute, and ordered the removal of statues showcased at the entrance of the institute without explaining the move.
In a country that went through wars, sanctions and a horrific totalitarian regime, art remained defiant against Islamic extremism throughout centuries. Art has always been an integral part of Iraqis’ lives. Yet today the turbaned Mullahs, who are turning secular Iraq back into the Stone Age, have denied Iraqis’ the right of keeping art part of their country, erasing the Mesopotamian heritage that we inherited thousands of years ago. I wish the Sumerian makers of the Golden Guitar were alive, 3000 years later to see what has happened to their country.

Iraqis raised their voice and democratically elected a secular slate last March, but the Islamic fanatics who wrote the post-Saddam constitution wrote it in a way that they will always be the winners who will get the majority of the seats in the parliament.
We need two things: a new constitution and an atheist regime. Not secular, atheist. That’s how we can achieve success in arts, science and modernity. As long as there is a religious regime, no country will ever progress! Gods and politics will never reconcile. I choose not to side with religion. I choose to side with sanity.  

FP: 33 Conflicts are Raging Around the World Today

Posted on by treasureofbaghdad

Irish satirist Jonathan Swift once said, “War! that mad game the world so loves to play.” This quote is summarized by a new photo essay published by Foreign Policy magazine. In it, powerful photos of the world’s conflicts describe what words sometimes fail to express.

Entitled “Planet War,” the photo essay mentions that from the bloody civil wars in Africa to the rag-tag insurgencies in Southeast Asia, 33 conflicts are raging around the world today, and it’s often innocent civilians who suffer the most.

International Community Calls for Iranian Student Activists’ Release

Posted on by treasureofbaghdad
There is no doubt what is happening in Iran these days is a turning point in the theocracy-run republic. So many strong voices have appeared to challenge the Islamic regime since the 2009 election revealed Ahmadinajad a president, again.

So many reports conducted by mainstream media and citizen journalists covered the Iranian regime’s abusive means to suffocate those voices. Among them are students who were arrested at universities across Iran.

I’ve just signed a letter of protest, addressing Ayatollah Amoli Larijani, Head of Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran, criticizing the arrests and demanding the freedom of student activist Majid Tavakoli and other Iranian students.

To read the letter, please visit: http://majidtavakkoli.freepoliticalprisoners.net/.

In modern Islam, Shiites Revived and Sunnis did not like that!

Posted on by treasureofbaghdad
A few days ago, I finished reading a very interesting book about the Middle East and more specifically about the Shiite Muslims. The Shia Revival by Vali Nasr is a must-read for all those who have no idea what the terms ‘Shiite’ and ‘Sunni’ mean. I actually recommend it more for those who are interested in knowing why there is a difference in the two terms and why was all this fuss called ‘sectarian war in Iraq.’
Although I knew many things mentioned in the book, I still found that there were things I did not really know. Nasr narrates, analyzes and discusses them in details.

I have a friend in Philly who is a Shiite Muslim from Saudi Arabia’s infamous Qatif city. We have always sat and discussed issues that concern our region, religion, and our lives as they are related to these things. One day, I was completely upset and mad at what I had discovered in our religion. The discussion we both had led to realizing that it’s not the problem was not in the religion itself more than the practitioners of Islam themselves who used certain things and interpreted them the way they wanted them to mean. The goal is to make others believe them, and nothing other using certain things from the religion to make them believe in was better than that. During that discussion, I told my friend about my memories of Islam in Iraq. I remember leaning back on the plastic chair, saying “Our religion was simple. The war made it gross.”

Indeed, it was as simple as knowing the basic things in the Quran, knowing your prophet is Mohammed and your God is Allah and that there were other prophets whom God chose to deliver his messages. Yes, there were Sunni and Shiite differences, but among the people (at least those in Baghdad whom I was one of) it was not something we really cared about. During those years, books about religion were rarely found. The secular Baathist regime made sure people in my generation do not understand or know what the real history behind the two sects was. My family did tell me that the Shiites were victimized throughout history, especially during the Abbasid Empire era, but they never really went into details about it nor they stressed on making me or my sister insist on knowing it because it was not a big deal then.

The internet revolution and the flow of the books and the articles about the real history between the two sects appeared on surface in the aftermath of the US.-led invasion of Iraq, letting me and many others in my generation be able to read and learn about that grim and gruesome history of wars and struggle to get power.

One of these books is the Shia Revival. The book opened my eyes to many things that I did not before the war. I knew it all started when Prophet Mohammed died but did not know other details, including the fight between Iran and Saddam was a Shiite-Sunni fight. I know understand why the Arab countries supported Saddam against the “Evil Persians” and why Iran went on for eight years to fight Saddam. The goal was who would dominate? The Sunnis who wanted the Arab World always be Sunni or the Shiites, represented by Iran then, who wanted to spread their faith to a larger crowd in the Arab World?

Addressing the West in his book, Nasr relates the Shiite rituals to those of the other religions. This was something that I did not really know. Nasr also talks about Saudi Arabia’s Wahabism a lot. It is widely connected to the struggle between Sunnis and Shiites these days. It goes way back to the days when the Wahabis invaded the holy city of Karbala where Imam Hussein is buried and slaughtered the Shiites there, believing that they were infidels and tomb worshipers. He also writes about the Lebanon Shiites and how they emerged as a fighting and strong force in the region, making even Sunnis follow them in their fight against Israel which was occupying their land for decades. Then, came the Iran-Iraq war and the whole struggle of keeping the Shiites away from domination. There is also a long, detailed and very interesting chapter about Khomeini and his role in Shiism, followed by an interestingly-analyzed chapter about the new Iraq which he called it ‘The first Shiite Arab state,’ a term that I’ve never heard before and a one that is so true.

Overall, the book shows that the struggle is not religious more than political. Peoples from both sects were caught in the middle of this conflict. They were used and brain-washed over the decades to create differences.

Anyways, it is a wonderful book and a good source that I strongly recommend to readers interested in learning about political Islam.

The other book I’m sunk in its waters now is Robin Wright’s Dreams and Shadows: the future of the Middle East.

Blog.bassamsebti@gmail.com


The Bullies’ New Fight

Posted on by treasureofbaghdad
When Saddam said he would fight the Americans fiercely if attacked he was just bluffing. He didn’t have anything to fight them with. Iran’s officials are saying the same if attacked by the U.S. and Israel. However, the equation is not similar. Iran is not Saddam’s Iraq. It’s much stronger.
Last Saturday, The Independent reported that Iran would attack back if attacked. The paper quoted the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Mohammed Jafari saying, “Iran’s response to any military action will make the invaders regret their decision and action.” The same thing was mentioned in an interview conducted by the Washington Post’s Thomas Erdbrink’s with Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi, special adviser to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “As has been said before: Any government that tries to invade Iran will regret its actions,” said Hashemi.
Is that possible? I guess it is. Since the end of its war with Iraq in 1988, Iran has not been directly involved in any war. During all these years, their industry-militarily and socially- grew greatly due to the self-sufficient policy the country has adapted. It’s a wealthy country and is easily capable of depending on this wealth to improve their military.
If attacked, I believe Iran would really retaliate. Their military is not as ill-equipped as Iraq’s under Saddam. Let’s not forget that Saddam’s air force was banned and that was one of the strongest reasons why he lost when Iraq was invaded by the U.S.-led forces. Iran, on the other hand, does have the ability to fight the Americans or the Israelis by air force. If so, the results would not be easy or simple. Iran can easily fly over Iraq and bombard American military bases, while others would spray Israel- which is not far from Iran- with a string of rockets and missiles that would horrify the Jewish nation’s people who are already terrified of the small rockets launched by Hezbollah and Hamas.
Iraq, of course, will be in the middle. There is nothing more to be done by then. I suspect the Americans would regret the day they supported Maliki, his government and the Shiite-majority parliament. Maliki has just said his stance on all of this fuss: his government would not allow Iraq to become a launching pad for an attack on its neighbor. Of course, it wouldn’t. Iran has been a major role player in the Iraqi politics since Saddam was even in power. When he was ousted, Iraq became officially in the hands of the Iranian regime like candy in a basket. Very simple, and yet the Americans still do not get it. In his book “War Journal,” Richard Engel wrote about this issue which most Americans did not even consider worthy thinking about. The war made Iran very happy because they toppled their long-term enemy and brought their fellow Shiites to power. Now, if the Americans launched strikes from Iraqi lands, this would make the Americans big liars because they stressed on the fact that Iraq is sovereign and no longer occupied by them. It’s not like Qatar, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia whose governments did let them launch their rockets from their lands. I doubt Maliki or any Shiite politicians approve attacks from Iraqi lands. But if they do, Iranians will consider them betrayers of the nation that hosted them during their struggle against Saddam.
In the end, not only Americans and Israelis would suffer the hard strikes Iran would launch, but also the Iraqi people would because they are going to be stuck in the middle. It’s been five years since they never felt peace, and more wars would drag them again into another well of bombardments and strikes. I believe Shiite militiamen who have been well-trained by Iran would not sit back and watch. They will be on their trainers’ side, of course. That’s the whole objective of why they were trained, in addition to weaken the Americans in Iraq. Along their side, I think Sunni insurgents would seize the opportunity of the Americans’ vulnerability and fight them fiercely. They hate the Shiites but as it is said, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Then, Iraq would be dragged again into another wave of disasters, wiping off all the efforts to stabilize it.
The problem in this issue is that all sides involved (Iran, Israel and the U.S.) are arrogant bullies. It looks like fourth grade kids fighting outside their school’s yard, except that this one may include rockets, tanks, and warplanes. None of them understands that they will all hurt their people. In my opinion, they should sit down and negotiate before they drag the world into another bloody war. The world has witnessed enough wars and needs a break. It really does.