By Majed Iqbal
In October 2005, the then British Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, made a speech to the right wing neo-conservative
"What drives these people on is ideas. And, unlike the liberation movements of the post-World War II era, these are not political ideas like national independence from colonial rule, or equality for all citizens without regard for race or creed, or freedom of expression without totalitarian repression. Such ambitions are, at least in principle, negotiable and in many cases have actually been negotiated. However, there can be no negotiation about the re-creation of the Caliphate; there can be no negotiation about the imposition of Shariah law".
An interesting statement to say the least, which coincided with the governments feeble attempts to try and ban a legitimate political party in the UK advocating the re-establishment of a caliphate for the Muslim world. What seemed to be more delusional than this was Charles Clarke’s attempts to paint a picture of the Islamic Civilization which boasts a 1400 years of rich political, social, cultural, educational and economic history, to one in his eyes no different to current
However, its not only Charles Clarke who was interested in this discussion over two years ago. Senior politicians, including George Bush are now 'warning' of the consequences of its re-establishment. Bush, in a speech to the American nation on the 8th of October 2005 stated:
"The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region, and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia."
On December 5th 2005, the then US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld in remarks pertaining to the future of
"Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic Caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East and which would threaten the legitimate governments in Europe, Africa, and
Tony Blair after 7/7 also referred to the need to confront an "an evil ideology" that included "the establishment of effectively Taliban States and Shari'ah law in the Arab world en route to one Caliphate of all Muslim nations".
Despite the attempts to sketch out a medieval entity populated with religious zealots, perhaps if Mr. Clarke had possibly scratched his head and try to understand exactly why the caliphate is a model which Muslims internationally, stretching from the Middle East, Africa, to South Asia place their confidence in. Maybe attempting to reason this may have aided him to draw his conclusions better. Let’s put some facts on the table for us to consider.
Couple this with nearly all of the Rulers in the Muslim world who are un-elected, un-representative and have imposed themselves through usurpation of power. Musharraf, Mubarak, Ghadaffi, House of Saud, karimov, karzai, Noor-al Maliki; What are their credentials? Who installed them in power? Do they represent the interests of the masses? In fact President Mubarak won the last elections with a landslide victory of 99.9% of the Votes? Definitely a shining example of true democracy in place.
With such a backdrop and years of experimentation with various models of governance ranging from Democratic socialism, Presidential democracy, Arab nationalism, Secular democracy, Arab Socialism, Real democracy, Sham democracy, parliamentary democracy and copy and paste Capitalism; it is now that the populations of these regions have forfeited these bankrupt models and evaluated their aspirations for the caliphate;
So is there anything wrong with ascribing yourself to a call which aligns you to the most successful civilisation and the longest serving ideology since the dawn of man? If Western Politicians are worried about the Islamic Ideology being outdated, then they may want to consider checking out the dates for democracy which goes back to the Greeks from the time of Aristotle, Plato and Socratese; which is centuries earlier than Islam.
So Charles, is the re-creation of the Caliphate and imposition of Shariah law for the Muslim world still non-negotiable?
