The fanfare surrounding the announcement from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) concerning the normalisation of its relationship with the Zionist entity was quick to subside, as the realisations that ties which had already been normalised to protect a land from occupation that had already been occupied was not an event worthy of significant mention.
Although there were notable and commendable expressions of condemnation, the collective shrug of indifference from the Ummah suggested, that in fact, this normalisation of ties was between Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum and the the Zionist entity, and the Ummah in general, bears no responsibility for this heinous crime, and has no intention to normalise its ties with the Zionist entity.
The desire to normalise ties with the Zionist entity is not restricted to the rulers of the UAE alone. It seems that the long cherished cause of the land of Isra wal Miraj has been thrown under the bus by regimes across the muslim world, simply at the behest of Trump and his much vaunted deal of the century.
Even an established journalist in Pakistan, Kamran Khan, couldn’t resist the urge to comment, where he stated in a tweet
“huge historic development the UAE has recognised Israel and decided to establish normal diplomatic ties with erstwhile enemy state; it’s a massive lesson for Pakistan as it remains steadfastly attached to Arab interest while choosing its foreign policy.”
Although he failed to elaborate on what was huge and historic about a state built upon the exploitation of poor foreign labour capitulating to foreign occupation, his labelling of what the Ummah feels as an Islamic cause rather than an Arab cause, highlights the gulf that exist between the political elites of the muslim world and its populations.
The actions of the rulers of the UAE and the attitude of our rulers in general, raise important questions about the nature of governance in the Islamic world. It is a rare occurrence that a government of any Western nation will flout strong and established public opinions to make decisions contrary to it. Conversely, in our nations, public opinion or what is euphemistically known as the Arab street, seems to bear little or no influence on the decisions that regimes in our nation’s make.
Tin-pot dictators and autocratic regimes aside, even for what are apparently democratically elected regimes: their policies are more influenced by the diktats of Western powers than the opinions of those that purportedly elected them. This forms the crux of the matter. Although Western colonialist nations have physically left our lands, the vestiges of their colonial endeavours remain strong.
Both the civilian and military elites of our land remain colonised; the inferiority they feel towards their former, or as many suggest, current colonial masters, is palpable, and in many ways, their thrones are secured by these very same powers. For example, it is abundantly clear that Muhammud Bin Suleman’s rule is buttressed by the United States, and the choice of rulers in a plethora of different Muslim countries is influenced by a variety of foreign powers.
The advice and dictates that are sought from Western capitals, their subservience to Western institutions like the UN, IMF and WHO, greatly influences the policies of our nations both domestic and foreign.
When we return to the issue of normalisation of ties with the Zionist entity, then the position of president Erdogan is most galling. His condemnation of the UAE’s decision to normalise ties with Zionist entity belies the huge political, economic and diplomatic ties that exist between his regime and the Zionist entity. His adoption of the Palestinian cause is simply lip-service pandering to an increasingly conservative electorate, but his actions, similar to what he has done in Syria, are more akin to US foreign policy objectives than any interests that Turkey may have.
In the minds and hearts of the Ummah, the cause of Palestine like the cause of Kashmir and many other causes are Islamic causes requiring an Islamic solution. There is very little appetite among the Ummah to capitulate to the Zionists or any other aggressor. The ayah from Surah Mumtahina:
إِنَّمَا يَنْهَاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذِينَ قَاتَلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَأَخْرَجُوكُم مِّن دِيَارِكُمْ وَظَاهَرُوا عَلَىٰ إِخْرَاجِكُمْ أَن تَوَلَّوْهُمْ ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُمْ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
“Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion – [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoer.” [Surah Al-Mumtahanah 60:9]
Is not lost upon the Ummah, rather it is the self serving leaderships across the Islamic world that endeavour to change the pure sentiments of the Ummah with the flimsiest of excuses.
مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ كَمَثَلِ الْعَنكَبُوتِ اتَّخَذَتْ بَيْتًا ۖ وَإِنَّ أَوْهَنَ الْبُيُوتِ لَبَيْتُ الْعَنكَبُوتِ ۖ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ
“The example of those who take protectors other than Allah is that of the spider, who builds (to itself) a house; but truly the flimsiest of houses is the spider’s house;- if they but knew. ” [Surat Al-‘Ankabut 29:41]
The parable of flogging a dead horse is what comes to mind when one considers the possibility that these regimes will change. Rather, what is required to rescue our situation is a Khilafah whose viewpoint, interests and policies reflect the basic motivations and beliefs of the Ummah.
