‘’ARCTIC’’ THE NEW GEOPOLITICAL FLASH-POINT AND BATTLE GROUND FOR WEALTH

‘’ARCTIC’’ THE NEW GEOPOLITICAL FLASH-POINT AND BATTLE GROUND FOR WEALTH.
The Arctic covers roughly 14 million square kilometers of water and solid ice, it’s almost the size of Antarctica for most of its part the region is inhospitable. In summer the weather can rise above the melting point yet in winter it can plunge down to negative (-45 degrees) Celsius.

This situation however is not to last in the coming decades climate change will make the Arctic passages and resources become more accessible. And given the abundance of resources and critical trade routes it should come as no surprise that the Arctic will turn into a new geopolitical flashpoint.

Geography plays a decisive role in shaping the interests of nations thus it stands the reason that when geographic conditions change national interests shifts as well. This is especially true when one considers the effects of climate change, Satellite images of the past decade show indisputable evidence of receding Arctic ice, this carries profound environmental consequences such as the migration and extinction of certain mammals and fish species! However, the diminishing ice will also have far-reaching consequences for the Maldives the Netherlands and Bangladesh. As sea levels are bound to rise these countries will face increased flooding yet perhaps the most profound consequences will be geopolitical by using a geology based probabilistic methodology the US Geological survey estimates that the Article holds 90 billion barrels of oil, 47 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. This is proportionate to roughly 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves and 30% natural gas reserves all in all the Arctic holds about 22% of the world’s undiscovered hydrocarbon resources!

Energy giants such as Shell, ExxonMobil and Rosneft are already competing for drilling licenses the potential environmental consequences however dreadful they may be are unlikely to stop these multinational companies. However, the extraction hydrocarbon resources are only feasible when the energy prices are right for instance with the current low energy prices the operation costs would be higher than the market prices meaning without sufficient profitable projections it would be very hard for companies to operate year-round. The claims of these companies and their respective nations are based on the UN convention on the law of the sea which oversees the Arctic region these signatories to this convention have an exclusive economic zone stretching 370 kilo meters from the coastal baseline within this area states have sovereign rights to explore and exploit living and non-living resources, and in certain circumstances a nation can extend its exclusive economic zone to 650 kilometers from the coastline if it can prove that the continental shelf extends beyond the standard deviation. Basically, by submitting scientific evidence to measure the continental shelf one can extend the exclusive economic zone and thus claim more resources and waters. Yet by calculating the continental shelf the territorial disputes become even more complicated they already are!

Denmark, Norway, Canada Russia and the United States have also bettered their respective continental shelf claims to the United nations these claims overlap one another and it’s up to the United Nations Commission on the limits of continental shelf to determine whether the claims are justified this legal body exists of dozens of international experts in geophysics hydrography, geology and other disciplines.

In the past the inhospitable conditions made the legal disputes meaningless, however by 2007 the Arctic ice cover was nearly 50 percent lower than in the 1950s, as climate change continues to open up the Arctic territorial claims and disputes will have to be settled by law. The legal framework sounds reassuring but the complication is that the United States is not a signatory to the law of the sea Washington objects to the treaty because it’s unfavorable to American economic interests for instance the total value of all the raw materials in the American Arctic is estimated to be about 8 trillion dollars by comparison the value in Russia’s Arctic is estimated to exceed 22 trillion dollars. Washington finds this unfair and thus rejects to sign the convention on law of the sea.

America’s non-participation could be views in two ways

1). Since the US is a non-signatory to the treaty it has by law not claimed an exclusive economic zone Or,

2). Washington’s absence in the agreement means that the United States doesn’t recognize the agreed upon exclusive economic zones of the other parties and thus reserves the right to act whenever it deems necessary. The uncertainty over Washington’s position is viewed with great suspicion by Moscow! Putin believes that the vast sum of resources values is worth fighting for as a result the Kremlin sees no other way to discourage American involvement other than establishing a substantial military presence in the Arctic.

However, it’s not just natural resources that are driving the Arctic disputes, in fact most nations understand that exploiting the Arctic is not feasible in the near future especially not with the current energy prices! Instead the immediate ambitions focus on dominating the Arctic trade. For instance, the maritime traffic between Europe and East Asia is expected to shift towards the Arctic ocean by 2040, a milestone was set in 2014 when a cargo vessel went through the Northwest passage without the escort of an icebreaker this route which connects the markets of East Asia and Europe through the Canadian Arctic archipelago is about 40 percent shorter than the Panama canal, moreover the waters of the Northwest passages are deeper than the Panama route and this allows for vessels to carry more cargo. Ultimately the Northwest passages are shorter cheaper and through fuel savings yield less greenhouse emissions. It is predicted that by 2040 the Northwest passages will be open for about two months a year, with the aid of special purpose ships such as icebreakers the opening of the passages could be extended for a few more months from a legal framework these passages are part of Canada’s internal waters, However due to its geopolitical value the US, Russia and the number of European countries dispute Ottawa sovereignty over the north-west passages and claim it as international straits. At the present Canada is engaged in scientific technical and legal proceedings needed to delineate the outer limits of its continental shelf.

However, Canada is likely to concede against the combined diplomatic power of the United States, Europe and Russia.

Anther corridors which connects the markets of East Asia and Europe and will become more accessible in coming years is the North-east passage also known as the Northern sea route. This passage runs along the Russian Arctic coast from the Bering Strait along Siberia to the Bering sea and North Sea. Just seven years ago no ships navigated through this passage however in 2013 71 ships had received permission to travel through the Northern sea route. On the average the Russian corridor is about 13 days shorter than the Suez Canal. As of 2018 the passage is open for several months a year but in 2015 the traffic dropped to 18 vessels due to the ongoing sanctions against Moscow. Other issue shipping companies faced in this passage include higher insurance premiums restrictions on vessels size a lack of emergency response facilities and outdated navigation systems. In other words, Russia still has a long away to go and lots of investments to make either way it’s expected that by the end of the century the Arctic ocean will be ice free during the summer! Ultimately the potential of the Russian and Canadian passages is enormous, but the benefits are unlikely to yield before mid-century in the Long term the maritime traffic between East Asia, North America and Europe will shift towards the Arctic meaning traditional corridors such as the Panama and Suez Canal will suffer considerable losses in revenues. As access through the Arctic passages becomes easier three objectives will drive the geopolitical needs of the Arctic nations. And they are as follows.

1). To establish authority over the new trading routes to reap the financial benefits.

2). To establish military bases to ensure that authority of the new trading routes.

3). Exploitation of the region’s hydrocarbon resources. However, this will depend on the energy prices.

As by 2016 there was nine legal disputes in the Arctic ocean all of them where legally complicated but none of the involved parties are determined as Russia.

This research is carried out by Caspian report research desk.

The Arctic remains a center of the future geopolitics.

©Kiberu malik

THE ”DEEP STATE”!

The deep state sounds like the stuff of conspiracies. It implies that there is a secret powerful group that has its own agenda and undermines the policies of elected leaders and politicians. Most people take unconditional standpoints claiming that it’s either fiction or fact. The truth however is more complicated. The deep state exists but it’s not as thrilling or malevolent as the concept indicates.

in political science the deep state is described as a collection of decision-making bodies within the government whose long-term policies are unaffected by changes at national levels the deep state is therefore portrayed as a relatively permanent body popular will has no influence on the group which with its civil service protections stays in place as presidential administrations come and go.

Although the Trump administration has promoted the term the concept of the deep state precedes the current government when President Eisenhower delivered his farewell speech in January 1961, he warned that the American nation must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex and that the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. Although Eisenhower didn’t use the phrase deep state, he was referring to it. The point is that the concept of the deep state has been around for a long time. In fact, the idea originated in Europe during and after the Napoleonic wars.

At the time European governments were again in increasingly more responsibilities while its tasks become more complex, This proved to be a precarious situation for the ruling administrations because the employees of the succeeding administrations would have to master the practices of their assignments which could take years.

It was evident that government operations had become so complex that they had outgrown a ruler’s reign to ensure the continuity of the government a new doctrine was necessary. As such European governments, separated the political and administrative domains. This practice mandated for a government that was run by skilled and talented employees or technocrats who were guided by political leaders. It was believed that the technocrats would rectify a government’s shortcomings. So, while politicians designed legislations and were replaced every few years technocrats provided the skill that was necessary to implement the complex changes. But since skill and ability took years to develop the technocrats remained in their offices far longer than their political counterparts.

in the United States. Following the Civil War, a similar narrative developed when a civilian workforce was assimilated in the agencies and departments of all three branches of government. This workforce known as the federal civil service was meant to limit the power of the president. Prior to this, all federal employees of the executive branch served at the pleasure of the president. However, since the head of state could appoint employees, he usually selected those who were loyal to him or employed people as a political favor. This was problematic because if federal positions could be auctioned off to the highest bidder, it would encourage a kleptocracy run by aristocrats. The only way to ensure a proper government that was run by people based on ability and talent rather than on the class privilege or wealth was to encourage technocrats to take part in a non-political civil service.

Members of this domain were tasked to implement laws passed by Congress and as a safety mechanism they could not be dismissed on political charges. This restraint the powers of the president. But like most political reforms it had unintended consequences.

As the ranks of the technocratic civil servants grew to handle the increasingly complex government operations the president was no longer assured that the implemented regulations were legislated by his administration and not the previous one. Thus, additional reforms were necessary to manage the government’s executive branch. The solution were Cabinet members who were tasked to supervise these civil servants and make sure that they were doing as they were told.

however, since there were thousands of civil servants the cabinet members required staff appointees of their own to carry out their responsibilities ultimately within a relatively short span of time, the number of federal employees increased exponentially. The chain of command was now headed by the president and continued through the ranks of the cabinet members followed by Cabinet appointees and finally civil servants.

However, since Cabinet members and their thousand appointees serve at the pleasure of the president they could and would be dismissed from office if the opposing political party won the elections. If Cabinet members and appointees had any chance of a career, they had to use the tools of their offices to secure their positions. So, in an ironic twist a non-political entity submerged itself in politics.

in the 20th century as technologies advanced new independent government agencies were formed. Some of these agencies such as the CIA and NSA were of vital importance in the geopolitical fight against the Soviet Union.

At the same time the Federal Reserve was necessary to uphold the Bretton Woods system and to ensure Washington’s global patchwork of alliances.

For these organizations to function efficiently with long term goals they required legions of expert based technocrats, subsequently to protect their permanent employees from political change. Many of the new security and financial institutions became autonomous agencies.

Today the clandestine network of long-lasting technocratic bureaucracies resembles living organisms that fight to protect their own domains from the intelligence and security services through the financial institutions. The technocrats compete with one another and often regard elected officials as brief nuisances who will be replaced in a few years.

Yet the growing layers of bureaucrats between the president and the civil service has also created friction within the government. In addition to this there are Cabinet appointees and civil servants who have been at their positions for decades performing such complex tasks that most non expert elected officials are simply incapable of understanding.

Many of these long serving experts see themselves as the guardians of their craft and when an elected leader presents a contradictory policy of the established technocrats tend to resist change by further complicating confusing and delaying the bureaucratic procedures. In modern American history every president had to cope with this political climate. But the status quo between technocratic bureaucrats and elected officials often intensifies when there is a southern ideological contrast from one administration to the next. Whether it’s the Joint Chiefs of Staff lying to Kennedy regarding the missile gap or the CIA infiltrating Nixon’s administration or the Department of Labor stalling reforms in retaliation of Reagan’s dismissal of air traffic controllers’ high-profile civil servants and Cabinet appointees from all agencies have spied and manipulated the elected leadership for decades. And with the rise of big data all these frictions have strengthened

More recent examples of elected officials struggling with technocratic bureaucracies can be traced to President Bush who actually campaigned as a non-interventionist but ended up fighting multiple wars. Another example is President Obama who argued against the surveillance state built up by Bush only to endorse the idea once he took office. The same principle applies to Trump who promised to drain the swamp but is governing as an insider. This is just the way things are done in Washington. In essence the deep state can be described as the permanent body of civil servants who occupy influential positions and to watch elected presidents come and go.

They are the result of stability and long-lasting governments and their permanent positions allows them to influence policies independently of elected officials. Having said that this is not a secret. It is a mechanism that is written into the legal system the layers of civil servants who were purposely created to limit the powers of rulers and swift political changes. Nearly every developed nation has a deep state of its own including Russia Turkey Iran Egypt China India France the United Kingdom and many many more there is no solution to this struggle because every developed government needs experts to carry out complex tasks but since the employees require years to build up their expertise they also inevitably construct a protective network to secure their own livelihoods which makes the deep state both a necessity as well as an obstruction. Considering all of this it can be said that the more things change the more they stay the same.

With all this about the deep state, it has been concluded that, the reason why some African presidents have feared to leave power, is the absence of a very strong deep state, which mutual interest as that for the presidents who form them.  There is an ongoing change in the Africa geo politics which necessity African nations to have strong deep states a long side a well participative democracy so that the popular support isn’t under mined. This will be covered in the next report on deep states.

LLB, MBA, MSPS

History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System. Part 5

In the previous episodes of the history of Islam we recounted the various developments that have shaped the core of Islamic identity. In part one we explained the foundations of the Caliphate by Caliph Abu Bakar. Following this we described the territorial expansions and the origins of Islamic jurisprudence by Caliph Umar. In the 3^rd part we recounted the evolution of the Islamic civilization by Caliph Uthman. and in the previous part (4^th) we explained how the Islamic civil war between Caliph Ali and Governor Muawiyah laid the groundwork for the schism between Sunni and Shia Islam. Following Ali’s victory against the radical Khawarij group the latter planned the assassination of the Caliph. Two years later a Khawarij follower stabbed Ali with a poisoned dagger. Passed away in a few days. But his death left behind a power vacuum and a fragmented state.

However, the death of Ali was not to be the end of the Shiites for Ali also left behind two sons Hassan and Hussein. Following the death of the four Caliph and the first imams of the Partisans of Ali immediately look to his eldest son Hassan as the rightful successor and named him the second imams. Yet Hassan exhausted from war and overtaken by grief argued that taking power now would constitute as a political power grab which would have disgraced the memory of his father. Instead of continuing the war Hassan reached an agreement with Muawiyah and stepped aside. The governor had finally realized his ambition, he would become the next Caliph. However, there were conditions;

Hassan was given the authority over the region of Kufa and the tax collection in this region was deemed for him and his Shiite community. More importantly the agreement stated that Caliph Muawiyah would have no right to appoint a successor. And that after his reign Hassan was to rule as the sixth caliph. This final point is critical to understand because it was meant to prevent the rise of the Umayad monarchy. All in all, of the agreement became known as the Hassan-muawiyah treaty. For this compromise Hassan is recognized as Hassan the peacemaker.

In the year six hundred and sixty-two. With no other contender left yet Muawiyah was crowned as the Caliph in Jerusalem. during the ceremony of his crowning he held a speech and explained that unlike the previous Caliphs, his legacy would be determined not by expanding the foundations of Islamic identity but by bringing glory and fortune to the Islamic world, the quote read as the following ‘I have desired the way followed by Abu Bakker and Umar. But I was unable to follow it and so I have followed a course with you which contains fortune and benefits for you. Despite some bias so be pleased with what comes to you from me even if it is little. When good is continuous even if it is little it enriches. Discontent. Makes life grim’. Even though the Shiites perceive muawiyah as a usurp. The new Caliph would continue want to become one of the most accomplished and skillful leaders in history. Once he settled in his office Muawiyah turned his attention to the Byzantines conquered a number of strategic islands in the Mediterranean Sea thereby securing the long-term naval interests of the Caliphate.

Muawiyah the kept pushing against the boundaries of the Byzantine Empire with a vengeance. In fact, roughly a decade after taking power in 674 Muawiyah sponsored a siege of Constantinople. Even though the siege against the Byzantine capital failed it came strikingly close to victory. Throughout his reign he sent a number of military expeditions in the Maghreb region and even established military outposts in present day Tunisia. This further accelerated the colonization efforts in the Iberian coastal towns and would lay the foundations for the military conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in 711. However, Muawiyah also understood that the conquered indigenous Christians would only remain content if they enjoyed religious freedoms. Thus, Muawiyah continued the policies set by Umar, minorities were allowed to practice their traditions religions and laws. If this level of freedom is what allowed the Caliph to extensively focus on conquests of new territories without concern for losing control over the realm. All in all of the borders of the state expanded trade and finance has flourished along with it the wealth and power of the Arab nobility but Muawiyah  rule was challenged by radical Khawarij movement who would continuously start revolts throughout the state.

Furthermore, due to the bitter conflict with the Byzantine Empire trade and communications between the Middle East and Europe were cut off and they would never again recover. Both regions would develop separate civilizations and thus for the Shiites would become second class citizens and the new Caliphate. Towards the end of the first decade that Muawiyah reigned the Caliphate. It became clear that Hassan who was forty-five years would outlive Muawiyah who was sixty-eight years. So, it was only a matter of time before Hassan would take the helm of the Caliphate! For Muawiyah this was a disastrous outcome it meant that everything he had worked for the glory fortune and nobility would be in vain.

The only way to ensure the continuation of his legacy and that of the Umayyad family was to nominate his eldest son Yazid as his heir. But the treaty with Hassan formed a major obstacle to this plan. As for Hassan ever since abdicating power to Muawiyah he and his brother Hussein lived in Medina. They kept a low profile and stayed out of the politics of the state. What happened next is disputed by both sides. The official story is that Hassan eight or drank something and he became seriously ill. Hassan sensed that death was imminent. How it happened. We don’t know. Hassan himself wasn’t sure since on his deathbed. Hassan refused to name his suspect to his brother Hussein for fear that the wrong person be killed in revenge.

However, most historians argue that the death of Hassan was in no way a coincidence. In fact, it was orchestrated by Muawiyah who persuaded either a servant or one of the wives of Hassan to poison him. After all coincidences involving Muawiyah have very little ground either way. In the year 670 Hassan the second imam and sixth caliph to be passed away. But before he died, he passed the torch of succession to his brother Hussein.

Thus, Hussein was now designated as the third Imam the one who was to continue the lineage of Muhammad and Ali. the reign of Muawiyah would extend for another decade, following the death of Hassan. Muawiyah felt that he was no longer obliged by the treaty he signed with Hassan thus Muawiyah proceeded to nominate his eldest son Yazid the first as the next caliph. But for the sake of formality Muawiyah had gathered the prominent tribal Arab leaders and set up a shura election council.

There was a brief moment of optimism as the tribal leaders started discussing the new candidates for the office of Caliph. Then suddenly a bodyguard of Muawiyah stood up and called for attention. As he walked slowly around the circle table staring every tribal leader in the eye. The Bodyguard pulled out his sword. And threatened the council members to vote for Muawiyah eldest son! The ploy worked. The Shura Council went through the proper democratic forms and chose Yazid to be their next Caliph! a major chapter in Islamic history had ended. The Shura Council would never again be summoned and the brief social experiment with democracy gave way to dynastic succession, Muawiyah would be succeeded by his son Yazid who in turn would be succeeded by his son. And so, the inheritance would continue on by the Umayyad family! in every practical sense Muawiyah rise to power was the death of the Islamic Caliphate and the birth of the Umayyad empire in an Islamic Fashion! On his deathbed in 680 Muawiyah held a conference session with his son in which he warned Yazid against mistreating Hussein it reads as the following. ‘As for Hussein what can I tell you concerning him. Be careful not to confront him except in a good way. Extend to him a free hand and let him roam the earth as he pleases. Do not harm him. show him the thunder and lightning never confront him with the weapons of war but rather bestow on him generous gifts give him a place of honor near you and treat him with do reverence. Be careful. Oh, my son that you do not meet God with His blood lust you will be amongst those that will perish’.

Yazid succeeded his father. The first thing he did was to ask all the governors to take an oath of allegiance to him. Every governor from every corner of Caliphate pledged his allegiance to the six caliph and showered him with gifts. However, Yazid only concern was the fealty of Hussein who had refused to bend the knee, Yazid who was a military man and fought in many battles during the conquests of his father was a man described as strong capable and brave. But he was also a man who was harsh ruthless even and he drank. He was the kind of man who perceived the very existence of Hussein as a threat to his reign Hussein who still lived in Medina soon learned of an assassination attempt on his life. Sponsored by the Caliph, now Hussain had enough. He left Medina to seek safety in Mecca once he arrived in his destination. Hussain openly declared that the appointment of Yazid as the Caliph was against the teachings of Islam and that he was going to challenge Yazid. A number of top figures approached Hussain and pledged their fealty to him. Furthermore, Hussain received letters from Kufa where the local people were asking for his support against the Umayyads.

According to the initial letters about 18,000 men from Kufa had already pledged their allegiance to Hussein and asked him to visit Kufa. It became apparent that many people considered Hussein as the legitimate successor as there was only one way to be sure. The third imam gathered his family friends and followers and with a company of roughly 70 to 150 people set out for Kufa. At the time it seemed like a David and Goliath story. Hussein who had no troops set out on a quest to overthrow the mighty tyrant. It is hard to imagine what the plan was. It may seem as if Hussein intended to start a firestorm of revolt by inspiring the local tribes to join him. But just before he left for Kufa Hussein gave a final sermon. He said that if he the son of Ali and the grandson of Muhammad could not stand up to tyranny then who would?  he continued and mentioned how he was sure to be slain. It reads as the following ‘the death is a certainty for mankind. Just like the trays of necklace on the neck of young girls and I am no mirth of my ancestors like the eagerness of Jacob to Joseph everyone who is going to devote his blood for our sake and is prepared to meet Allah must depart with us’ in a sense it was more of a farewell speech. For this reason, Hussein’s journey to Kufa was not so much a quest to overthrow the Umayyads but rather a symbolic sacrifice to humankind. Despite all the advice against travelling to kuffar Hussein set forth.

When the Caliph got news of this development, he gave the order to crush Hussein and his followers.  on their way to Kufa which was only two days away. Hussein’s company and counter the Kuffar army who had pleaded for Hussein’s visit earlier. Now however they had changed their allegiances and opposed Hussein. The Army urged Hussein to take a different road to Kufa and so he did.  a few days later in the desert south of Karbala anther Kufa an army intercepted at this time trapped Hussein’s company. The climate was hot and dry. Hussein’s company was within smelling distance of the Euphrates River but roughly 5000 horsemen blockaded the river. So, they had no water supply. This stalemate lasted for days. Several of Hussein’s followers attempted to negotiate for access to water but they were denied. Meanwhile many of these civilians from Hussein’s party had died of thirst. Then on the night before the battle. Hussein gathered his men and told them that they faced certain death.

He announced that all his followers were free to leave camp, but none left. The next morning the battle of Karbala commenced. The Kuffan army started the offense by showering Hussein’s men with arrows. Most of the soldiers of Hussein were shot or injured then so in order to prevent indiscriminate injuries from arrows on Hussein’s encampment which had woman and children in it Hussein sent out his fighters into single combats one by one they fell. Hussein himself being a remarkable swordsman. Much like his father defeated every opponent in single combat. Then an arrow hit his chest. Someone else hit his head with a stone and another man plunged a sword into Hussein.

As the third Imam fell to his knees the soldiers started looting his belongings. When the last of Hussein’s band was gone. The opposing army swooped in and to their surprise Hussein was still breathing praying even, he couldn’t move. But he was clearly alive as the Kuffan commanders approached Hussein. Someone said What are you waiting for. Put the man out of his misery. Then someone else hit Hussein on his head and beheaded him. His head was sent to the Caliph.

The Kuffan army then proceeded to loot the tents stripped the woman of their belongings and then set the encampment on fire. Anyone who survived was enslaved and brought forth the governor of Kufa. This included Hussein’s only remaining son Ali Ibn Hussein. the governor sentenced him to death, but he was saved by his aunt Zainab who was also present during the Battle of Karbala.

The captives from the battle were marched to Damascus to meet the Caliph. It is during this trip to Damascus that Zainab took on the mantle of leadership. Somehow, she managed to convince Caliph Yazid to release the captives and to allow them to return to Medina. On to the way back Zainab and these survivors made a stop at Karbala to mourn the death of Hussein and the others. Men and woman alike. Zainab managed to inspire these survivors. She would go on and become a model of defiance and she would play a great role in the future of the partisan movement. As for Ali ibn Hussein the Shiites would name him the 4th imam! back in Damascus Caliph Yazid who had neglected his father’s advice believed that by force he had to eliminate the Shiite factor.

He couldn’t be more wrong of the partisans were furious. Not only were they the underdogs of the empire the Caliph of this empire had ruthlessly murdered and beheaded the grandson of Muhammad. The partisans wanted no part of this Islamic society. What started out as a political question over dynastic succession transformed into much more than that.

The martyrdom of Hussein became a core principle in the beliefs of the partisans. It influenced their rituals literature music of the mindset as well as their theology. For the Shiite identity. Hussein is recognized as the master of martyrs and martyrdom itself became equal to redemption and it forms a central part of their beliefs. Up until this day Shia Muslims commemorate the Battle of Karbala in the first month of the Islamic calendar. In some countries this ritual is experienced by self-flagellation. Martyrdom of Hussein ignited a firestorm throughout the empire. The partisans didn’t just set themselves apart from the mainstream Muslim community they became the opposition. Anyone who opposed the Empire’s tyranny corruption and the Arab nobility would find shelter and sympathy with the Shiites. This contributed to the enormous growth of the partisan movement.  Furthermore, over the century the notion of the Shiite being the underdog would find a strong support base in the alliance of ancient Persia. The Persians knew what it was like to be the underdogs in the Arab empire and this mutual experience of harassment and suppression would in time merge the two identities into one. As for Yazid he would die in three years after becoming Caliph he went out hunting but never returned. His remains were never found.

Yazid was succeeded by his son Muawiyah the second, who in turn died within a year. In the meanwhile, a number of rebellions would rise and the Umayyads entered a period of internal conflicts to more civil wars were fought the Umayyads barely came out on top it was a complex time with many dynamic changes occurring simultaneously so in order to deal with the setbacks the Umayyad rulers used the Jihads to redirect the focus of warfare against their neighbors. And it worked. Over the course of the century the Umayyad Empire conquered so much that its territories extended from the Indus River to the Iberian Peninsula for the mainstream Muslim community, the victories at the frontlines and the expansion of the state were a testimony to the divine truth of Islam. This state of perpetual war brought in enormous revenues as a result. Lavish buildings were constructed extravagant charity projects were undertaken public displays of splendor and glory were present in every city and never were the taxes raised.

All of these points contributed to the rapid conversions to Islam. But at the same time this system produced a side effect. The Arab nobility grew in power and its Arabic became the official language of the state. The Caliphate transformed itself into an Arab Empire. The freedoms that the minorities enjoyed before. Diminished over time. Anyone who wanted to succeed in business had to learn the Arab language and convert to Islam. Anyone who didn’t oblige by these rulings would continue their lives as second-class citizens. So, this too contributed to the assimilation of many Indigenous people into the Arabic culture and Islam. However, one group of people in particular refused to assimilate into the mainstream culture. The Persians!

Their homeland was conquered, and their culture was suppressed but the Persians remained a proud people. One other group that shared this suppressed faith were the Shiites as explained earlier this mutual underdog experience created a bond between ethnic Persians and the Shiites as the power and glory of the Almighty grew so too that the opposition increased in size. The opposition would merge with the Shiite Persian coalition and eventually about 70 years after the death of Hussein the situation reached a breaking point. The Abbasids from eastern Persia who were the result of Shiites merging with the Persians rose up in a revolution and drove off the Umayyads. a branch of the Umayyad family fled across North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula where they established the Caliphate of Cordoba in Spain.

The Abbasids dynasty, over the course of centuries would assimilate the scientific knowledge of conquered civilizations.  ancient Greek Roman Persian Indian Chinese and Egyptian theories on subjects such as physics chemistry mathematics astronomy philosophy medicine and many more were translated into Arabic and Persian. This became known as the translation movement and it paved the way for a new class of scientific scholars known as the Mutazilah which in turn would set the groundwork for the Islamic Golden Age.

 But for all of its accomplishments the Abbasids which started out as a Shiite revolution ironically ended up in suppressing the partisans even more than the Umayyads over the centuries, the differences between Sunni and Shia Muslims would dramatically increase this era in history starting from Abu Bakker and ending with Hussein explains how Islam gradually transformed into a social political system.

We can trace back the origins of Islamic jurisprudence of the rise of radical Islamic groups and the role of women to this era in history.

And unfortunately, some of the good Islamic ideas regressed over the centuries. For example, multiculturalism and tolerance for outsiders the concept of a welfare state and the election committee which gives a democratic foundation to Islamic culture. In essence this chronicle of human drama forms a central part of understanding the mindsets and identities of Sunni and Shia Muslims in a way both sides lost the Democratic essence of the Caliphate paved the way for Muslim dynasties and the lineage of Mohammad was lost after the eleventh Imam. Neither side obtained what they had aspired for. Instead both communities became targets for politically motivated goals.

Thank you for bearing with me through these five long parts. I hope it has been interesting as well as educational. I also want to express my gratitude to all who assisted me in this research topic.

KM

LLB, MBA, MCPS

History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System. Part 4

The previous three articles of the history of Islam we described the first three Caliphs and their characteristics. We also discussed their most notable accomplishments and how they ruled the Caliphate. ABU BAKAR the wise community leader and the founder of the Caliphate had died from a fever, Umar the military thinker and the founder of Islamic jurisprudence was stabbed in his stomach by a mentally disturbed suspended slave. Uthman the merchant, the builder was beaten to death in his study room by his fellow Muslims.

Now it was the fourth Caliph turn but the future for Ali looked bleak at best ever since the disputes between Ali and Abu Bakker over a succession of Mohammed which we discussed in Part 1. Ali had gained a fiercely loyal following and despite Ali’s allegiance and loyalty to the first three Caliphs, a large group of Muslims still considered Ali as the only chosen and legitimate successor of Mohammed.

According to Shia scholars during the rule of the previous lives Ali’s family was harassed a portion of their property was seized and in one instant even resulted in the miscarriage and death of his wife Fatima. However, Sunni scholars say these allegations regarding the seized property are made up and that the miscarriage and death of Fatima was an accident. What we do know for certain is that despite everything Ali remained a strong supporter for unity amongst Muslims and he continued to advise the Caliphs on a variety of political and religious subjects. For example, it was Ali who advised Caliph Umar to set the first hijra which marks the immigration of Mohammed from Mecca to Medina as the beginning of the Islamic lunar calendar.

In his spare time Ali held sermons and lectures and over the years his following grew in numbers. Eventually they became known as the party of Ali or the party sons for short which in Arabic means the Shiites. The party sounds had title their leader as the imam. If the mainstream Sunni Muslim community had the Caliph, then the Shiites would have the imams. Thus, the meaning of Imam has different meanings for Sunni and Shia Muslims. Aside this title difference there was no cultural or religious difference between the Muslims at the time. There were no sects’ cults or branches. More importantly there was no schism! at least not in the beginning and not in the open.

Welcome to Our second last part of the history of Islam and the Islamic state! When Ali was elected as the new Caliph the very first thing, he did was address the people. He made it clear that he had accepted the office of Caliph on their turbulent times. Ali implied that he would seek to resolve the murder of Uthman and bring the perpetrators to justice. However, he also explained that even more important than justice was political stability and unity. The Caliph argued that prior to the murder of a man by the Egyptian delegation the delegation had started out as victims and their complaints were legit. Corruption extortion monopolies and aristocracies were deeply embedded in the core of the state. Ali stated that he would first seek to end the economic exploitation and the corruption of the state and the grasping materialism displayed in the name of Islam. Purging the state of corruption required reversing the policies Uthman.

However, the problem here was that in the 12 years that Uthman reigned the Caliphate a whole new elite class of Muslims had risen, and they had no wish to lose their wealth power and social privileges. From the perspective of the Muslim elite, Ali was a threat to their power and lifestyle. So, the top notables of the elite had withdrawn from Medina and rallied under the banner of Governor Muawiyah in Damascus who was the leading member of the powerful Umayyad family. If caliph Ali was a threat to the Muslim elite and their family. Then Governor muawiyah was the patron of the elite’s wealth and safety. This was the new state of affairs. Back in Damascus an entirely different story was spreading. Muawiyah being a skillful politician was holding sermons in his provinces and rallying the support for his cause. He publicly demanded vengeance for the murder of Caliph Uthman. Furthermore, Muawiyah refused to swear fealty to the new Caliph. And in fact, he pointed out to Ali’s inability to restore justice as the main reason for Ali to step down as the Caliph. However equally important we knew perfectly well that vengeance for mine was unrealistic. For one nobody knew exactly who the assassin was or who dealt the final blow. Moreover, it wasn’t even practical. As we explained in the previous article, there was no army in Medina and the mob still ruled the streets of the capital. Ali simply did not have the numbers to realize what was demanded of him. It was a classic political ploy by Muawiyah!.  make a reasonable yet unattainable demands to your opponent with the sole purpose to disgrace him in the eyes of the public.

Soon after his election Ali proceeded with his plan for reform. He dismissed all the governors that Uthman had placed in power and set out new people to replace them. However, none of the governors agreed to step down. In the meantime, more obvious demand for revenge was so convincing that the prophet’s youngest wife Aisha known as the mother of the faithful addressed the people in Mecca and called for vengeance for the blood of Uthman to vindicate the honor of Islam. The intentions of Aisha are disputed but most modern historians agree that it was a call to war. The question is against who? With the financial support of the aristocratic governors Aisha proceeded to assemble an army and laid out a military campaign. It is important to note that by this time the Egyptian delegation who was responsible for the assassination of Uthman had dispersed throughout the realm. Many of the delegation rebels were rumored to have fled to the city of Bashara in southern Iraq, and that is where the murder of the faithful set her army marching with relative ease. She crushed the local rebels and, in the meantime, conquered the city Asia’s unauthorized Army and her close ties to Muawiah made many believe that under the pretext of justice for the assassination of Uthman she was actually seeking to remove Ali from power at around the same time. A rumor was circulating throughout the Caliphate that Ali had in fact conspired to murder Uthman in his attempt to seize power. For Ali. This proved to be the final stroke. It seemed like the Caliphate was collapsing from within. The Caliph had no control over the state. His authority was undermined by the elite. Rumors were spreading of him being the assassin and now an unauthorized Army was formed and sought to seize power.

For these reasons Ali undertook the only action he could, he assembled an army and set March to face the mother of the faithful. However, there was a lot of confusion among the Moslems. Both sides claim to be fighting for justice and Islam. And yet two Muslim armies were now on a collision course. as Ali marched his army from Medina to the north. Various tribesmen joined his ranks and the leaves Army grew in size. But as we pointed out earlier the Egyptian delegation had dispersed throughout the realm and since both Aisha and Ali had gathered an all-volunteer army. Both their military ranks were infiltrated by the mob participants. When Ali reached Bashira he sent one of his most trusted commanders to hold negotiations for a truce and to everyone’s surprise it worked. Aisha admitted that she didn’t believe the rumors regarding Ali’s involvement in the assassination of Uthman. She also admitted that she was in fact escalating an already tense situation. By the end of the day Aisha had agreed to lay down her arms and join forces with Ali. They were set to meet the next day to discuss the terms. Both armies welcomed and celebrated the news. At this point in history is really an acknowledgement to both leaders. Despite tensions and emotions, they kept their heads cool and came to an agreement.

However, since the ranks of both armies were infiltrated by the map participants during that night the mob leaders conspired to provoke a situation that would lead to an all-out war. A number of more participants from both armies crossed over to the opponent’s camps. They started burning tents and launched a simultaneous surprise attack. The common soldiers from both sides believed they had been betrayed by the other. And before Ali or Aisha could intervene an all-out battle had ensued and the heat of the fight. Aisha rode a camel straight into the battlefield and commanded her troops. From that moment onwards the battle became known as the Battle of the camel. Some 10000 people from the fighting but in the end, Aisha was captured, and Ali emerged victorious. Ali and Aisha discuss the events and made peace with each other. Aisha returned to Medina and would later on become one of the most distinguished and respected scholars of Islam. Things look different for Ali. He could not return to Medina. He still had to face Muawiyah in Damascus. However, it’s important to note that at the time the people in Syria differed from the people in Mesopotamia. Prior to the Caliphate of the Levant and Mesopotamia were sworn enemies as they were part of the Byzantine and ssassanid empires respectfully. Ali made the city of kuffar in Mesopotamia the new capital of the Caliphate as a reward for the local people’s support for Ali. This aggravated the people in the Levant who still perceive the Persian dominated Mesopotamia as their historic rivals. In essence the frontier between Ali and Muawiyah was split along the ancient Byzantine Persian lines. The governor and the Levant Muawiyah used this and manipulated the public opinion with the people’s support, Muawiyah mobilized his standing army and set marched to meet Ali and his partisans on the battlefield some six months after the Battle of the camel in the year six fifty-seven of the armies of Ali and Muawiyah encountered each other on the banks of the Euphrates River. Ali was in control of the river bank and even though skirmishes erupted there was a stalemate which lasted for months.

Both sides were holding back as both leaders wanted to prevent the bloodshed which would have cost the attacker religious piety and authority. Eventually the stalemate collapsed and mass scale fighting erupted. The battle lasted for four days and cost the lives of roughly 70000 people. On the final day of the battle Ali renewed his attack and was gaining a decisive upper hand. The Shiites were crushing the ranks of more obvious army in a desperate attempt to turn the battle and forced a new strategy. He had his spare man attached pages of the Quran to their lands tips and set them marching slowly towards the opponent. The spare men were followed by Muslim scholars who were reciting Islamic versus. The intimidating strategy worked. Ali’s partisans there not to raise their swords against the Holy pages of the Quran. A group of soldiers even threatened Ali to hold negotiations with this skillful tactic while they had forced Ali’s hand and arbitration ensued. Everyone expected Muawiyah surrender in exchange for some guarantee. What happened instead was that while the proposed that he remained the ruler of Syria and Egypt and Ali remained the ruler of everything else. Given that Ali was on the brink of a decisive military victory the proposal seemed like a poor idea.

Thus, Ali refused it. However, this was Muawiyah the man who built his fortune with his wits. The proposal was never the real objective but the negotiations where! you see by agreeing to hold negotiations as equals. Ali had inadvertently lowered his status as the rightful Caliph and in the meantime raised more of his claim over Syria and Egypt. Thus, the end results didn’t even matter. Muawiyah was now considered the de facto ruler of Syria and Egypt. The governor had checkmated the Caliph!. As Ali and his partisans were returning to the new capital in Kufa. A large portion of the Army roughly 12000 men kept their distance from the main body of the army. It was the same group of men who had earlier threatened Ali to hold negotiations. However now this group was quarrelling that Ali had betrayed Islam by agreeing to a truce and that he should have continued to fight. The commanders argued that they had opposed Muawiyah rebellion as they considered Ali to be the rightful Caliph. But now they also opposed Ali for accepting to subject his legitimate authority to arbitration. Everything pointed out to a mutiny, but it was in fact much worse than that. this group of mutineers split off and formed their own party called the Khawarij and later developed into an anarchist movement who their leader was is a heavily disputed subject. Some sources even said that there were multiple figures and leaders all who had multiple different names and titles. What we do know for certain is that they were the very first sect in Islam.

First to leave the mainstream religion in fact that is what the name Khawarij means. ‘The ones who left’ at the time nobody knew or understood this. But this wasn’t just a mutiny. It turned out that the leading members of the Khawarij mutineers were in fact the very same people from the Egyptian delegation. They were the same people who were responsible for the rebellion against Uthman and his assassination. And as they dispersed throughout the state and infiltrated the ranks of Ali’s all volunteer army. The Khawarij were directly involved in setting the stages for the battles involving Aisha and Muawiyah. In fact, it turned out that this group of mutineers had orchestrated every major event from the start. It was a conspiracy hidden within the conspiracy. Now the same people had reinvented themselves as the Khawarij and they would forever change history by setting the groundwork for Islamic radicalism.

Khawarij believed that the act of sin was analogous to disbelief. Thus, every sinner was a non-believer. Even though this was contrary to the teachings of Muhammad as one can be a sinner and yet remain a Muslim. Many young Muslims were incorporated into this new doctrine. On the surface it may look like a small philosophic dispute but according to the Khawarij doctrine this drastically changed the philosophy of jihad which as we explained in part two of the Islamic history series existed out of the realm of peace and the realm of war. However, the Khawarij doctrine expanded the realm of war to include every Moslem who did not agree with their view, thus it basically meant that the Khawarij we were at war with the known world.

As they did parted ways with Ali and his partisans. The Khawarij settled in a town called El Nahawar to the south of Baghdad. There, they killed the local governor and establish their own state. In their isolation. The Khawarij followers transformed and twisted their views on Islam. For example, the Khawarij agents would merge themselves in a crowded market whilst having their daggers and swords concealed. The Khawarij followers would then plunge the blades into unsuspecting civilians and go on killing until they themselves were killed. It was the predecessor of the suicide bomber. The first form of Islamic terrorism over the next two years. The Khawarij ideology developed and took shape. They began recruiting young followers from other parts of the Caliphate and encourage them to emigrate to their town. As we explained the principles and tactics of the Khawarij, can easily see parallels with other modern like-minded groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Boko Harama Etc. For this reason of the Khawarij are considered the prime source of Islamic radicalism. Soon Ali realized the depth of the Khawarij conspiracy and how this reactionary group was in fact the Egyptian delegation. The very same group who had manipulated and conspired the chain of events and set the stage for the Islamic civil war, they had deceived everything and everyone from the beginning. Now they had to establish their own state and were conducting terrorist attacks throughout the caliphate. Ali had to act!

 He assembled a new army and in the year 659 he finally moved against the Khawarij in the town of El Naharam. Caliph emerged victorious but not all Khawarij Commanders were killed. Some had escaped.

The surviving commanders once again dispersed throughout the land and planned their next move. Two years later following their defeat. The Khawarij were ready! Their plan was to assassinate the three leaders responsible for their failures. Caliph Ali, Governor Muawiyah and Al-ahas, who had mediated the negotiations between Ali and Muawiyah!   the assassination attempts were to occur simultaneously as the three leaders came to lead the morning prayer in their respective cities of Kufa Damascus and Fulstant

That day the course of Islamic civilization and identity was changed forever. Muawiyah would escape the assassination attempt with injuries while, Al-ahas due to a sickness was absent during the prayer and in his stead his deputy was killed. But Ali, The Caliph of the Islamic State was attacked while praying in the Great Mosque of Kufa by a Khawarij agent by the name of Abdul Rahman. The cut wasn’t fatal. But the poison in which the dagger was dipped in was! a few days later Ali passed away! leaving behind an enormous gap of power a fractured state and two sons Hassan and Hussein. Thus, immediately following the death of the fourth Caliph and the first imam the partisans of Ali look to his eldest son Hassan as the rightful successor and named him the second Imam. Hassan was now tasked with carrying on the legacy of Mohammed and Ali.

However, the interaction between Muawiyah and Hassan and Hussein were set in motion an irreversible schism in the Muslim community. This and more. We will cover in the next and final part in the history of Islam and political system series.

KM

History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System. Part 3

The first and second part of the history of Islam. We talked about the establishment of the Caliphate by the first Caliph. Abu Bakker and the expansion and implemented reforms by the second Caliph Umar. However, before Umar’s death a committee known as the Shura was established with the purpose to select the new Caliph and to seek the approval of the Muslim community known as the Ummah.

From the two leading candidates Uthuman and Ali, Uthman was elected as the third Caliph. And even though Uthman in his own words was not an innovator he certainly was a reformer. Prior to his conversion to Islam which man was a wealthy merchant from an influential family known as the Umayyads. In fact, his father was one of the richest people in the city of Mecca. Uthman inherited the wealth of his father at the age of 20 who by then had passed away! but being a skillful merchant man had managed to multiply his inheritance many times over and thus earned the nickname Uthman the wealthy.  before his conversion to Islam Uthman never drank nor smoked and despite his good looks for which he was known as one handsome he didn’t chase woman. When Uthman converted to Islam it enraged his family over the years of the Umayyad family members under the leadership of Abu Sufyan which turned out to be the most anti-Muslim faction within the Quraysh tribe. With months two wives denounced him for converting to Islam and so Uthman divorced his wives and married one of Muhammad’s daughters. Later on, he would take one more of the Prophet Daughters as his wife.

The early Muslim community was certainly pleased to have such a wealthy man in their ranks and Uthman helped his fellow Muslims in any way he could. Usually this man through financial support. For example, or man finance the immigration of a group of Muslims to Abyssinia. He spent lavishly on public facilities such as expanding the mosque and Medina and donating wealth to the public. Enormous wealth good looks and married to two of the prophet’s daughters Uthman had it all and it is exactly because of his good fortune that Uthman was a man driven by the sense of guilt. He spent much of his time fasting praying and reading the Quran. ‘Every day is doomsday’ Uthman once said! this God fearing, and guilt driven man would become the third Caliph of Rashidun Caliphate.

Welcome to our 3^rd part of the history of Islam and the Islamic political system. The lifetime of the second Caliph Umar, the state had expanded tremendously Islamic social institutions and Islamic jurisprudence was taking shape and a reign of Umar was filled with Discovery and adventurism. When Uthman came to power. He had to collect taxes repair bridges run courts set salaries and manage all the dull affairs of the Caliphate. But in history more often than not. The smallest and the dullest decisions can have the most profound long-term effects. For the Caliph, the first order of business was to settle the state’s finances. This was after all what Uthman knew best. Prior to this state expenses were not recorded or even calculated. And even though a state treasury and other financial institutions did exist, Uthman fully reformed and streamlined the whole system.

More than ever before the taxes of the Caliphate flowed through the capital. It was the state that financed state expenses, with this the Caliph further centralized the authority of the Caliph and the capital Medina. Over the next few years Caliph Uthman dramatically increased the state revenues and he did so by reforming and replacing the provincial governors. For example, when Amer the conqueror and governor of Egypt could not sufficiently provide revenues to the capital Uthman had him replaced with his own foster brother Abdullah of the former governor Amer strongly objected and stated that the new Governor Abdullah was abusing his authority by oppressing and starving the local Egyptian population just to increase the flow of revenues. But since Abdullah in a short span of time had actually managed to double the amount of revenues from Egypt replacing Amer as the Governor seemed to be the wise financial decision after all. This set forth a precedent during the reign of Uthman. Soon the governors of the provinces of kuffar Bashara were replaced as well, and over time the Caliph would replace more and more governors with people he trusted and knew were capable. But it happened to be that the people Uthman trusted and knew were capable were usually members of his own family the Umayyads. After the replacement of the Egyptian governor, Uthman made one more significant financial reform, He change the previous Caliph prohibition of Muslims confiscating lands in the conquered Christian and Jewish territories, Uthman being a merchant believed in economic freedom. So, he changed a ruling and allowed Muslims to purchase lands in the Conqueror territories.

Uthman further stimulated the land purchases by giving out state loans to Muslims to finance the endeavors, in a relative short time of the Muslim elite purchased and acquired valuable lands throughout the Caliphate. One group benefited from this arrangement more than the others, was Uthman own family clan the Umayyads.  Since his relatives were already wealthy and well-connected throughout the state. The Umayyads had an easier time taking out loans from the state treasury.

In the meantime, the economic overhaul by Uthman turned out to be so enormous that it stimulated the construction boom throughout the Caliphate, paved roads were repaired and expanded, New canals were dug. Irrigation systems were improved new ports and bazaars were constructed and regulated. About 5000 new mosques were constructed! Uthman the wealthy, Uthman the handsome had become Uthman the builder. The Caliphate was prosperous, and the Caliph was mostly admired and respected by the people! mostly but not by everyone.

During the reign of Uthman numerous revolts broke out in the former Sassanid territories most notably in the provinces of farce, Azerbaijan, Sestina, and Khorasan. The revolts eventually ended through various methods. Some regions accepted to pay a tribute. Some settled for autonomy but some regions. For example, Tabaristan the local population was crushed and slaved and massacred. In brief the reconquest of the former Sassanid provinces was actually bloodier than the initial conquests during the reign of Umar. All in all, the Caliphate had made minor territorial expansions during the reign of Uthman. That was because the Caliph was not a military man and he left all the military affairs in the hands of the local commanders.

Essentially the Caliphate only reinforced the territories conquered during the reign of Umar. The only significant military development was the establishment of the Muslim Navy of the governor of Damascus Muawiyah using the local expertise had constructed a large naval fleet one that was meant to rival the Byzantine Navy through the New Navy. Caliphate conquered the islands of Cyprus, Rodos, Sicily and according to some historians even established small colonies and trading outposts in the Iberian coastlines. However, the most significant military engagement was the Battle of the masts in which despite overwhelming odds the Caliphate new navy decisively defeated the veteran Byzantine Navy after Lucien Coast utterly shifted the power balance in the region. The Caliphate was no longer just the land power but also a naval power that could go head to head with anyone. One major important Islamic undertaking that was completed during the reign of Uthman was the definitive edition of the Quran.  the final book was compiled by the length of verses.

Uthman relatives had slowly but assuredly become the and political powerhouse of the Caliphate. They govern the biggest cities and trading centers. They own the most valuable lands and had the largest financial assets,  one particular  Umayyad member stood out the most, the caliph favorite cousin Muawiyah  the very same person who had constructed the Muslim naval fleet in a decade’s time Muawiyah the man who started out as the governor of Damascus and its surroundings had expanded his influence through political intrigue royal marriages land purchases trade expansions and through gifts by the Caliph,  In a decade’s time Muawiyah territories expanded to include everything from the Euphrates River to the Mediterranean coastline of Egypt. Furthermore, he had assembled a large standing army and a naval fleet loyal only to himself. What you have to understand here is that Muawiyah influence and power expanded very gradually. It didn’t happen overnight but over a span of 12 years. When you live in the present. This kind of developments are very hard to perceive. Over the course of 12 years the admired Caliph Uthman was now receiving objections and complaints from all over the Caliphate!  financial extortion corruption and heavy taxation were the leading grievances in Egypt with man’s foster brother Abdullah. The very same Abdullah who had replaced Amer as governor and of whom Amer had warned of was extorting the local population so severely that riots had erupted. The local Egyptian traders’ merchants and notables formed the Coalition wrote a letter to Caliph Uthman asking for the dismissal of the governor. Some time went by and the notables received no answer in return. And so, they decided to send a large delegation to petition the Caliph in person.

As this took place other delegations were sent from other provinces such as Kuffar and Bashara as well. On their way to Medina. The crowd of people had combined their strength under the Egyptian delegation before the Caliph had even realized that a large group of angry citizens were knocking at his door. The delegation argued that a decade’s worth of extortion by Governor Abdullah was enough. They wanted a change of authority. Initially Uthman did not want to face the crowd and had asked Ali to go out and speak to them on behalf of the Caliph. But it was Ali who convinced Uthman to go outside and address the people’s legitimate complaints. That is what happened Uthman addressed. The Egyptian delegation he promised to replace his foster brother in Egypt and sent the delegation home. The issue seemed solved and a crisis was averted. As the Egyptians were returning home along the way they noticed the particular suspicious man. They approached the man and searched him. It turned out he was a servant of the Uthman who was carrying a letter for the governor of Egypt. As the Egyptians unfolded the letter and read the contents. The whole world came crashing down. The letter stated that as soon as the delegation showed up that the Court of Egypt. Governor Abdullah was to execute the entire delegation. It was seemingly signed by the Caliph himself. The Egyptian crowd feeling betrayed and abandoned by their own Caliph returned to Medina with the fury. Uthman came out to meet them on the steps of his residence.

The delegation showed Uthman the letter and Caliph was stunned and swore by God that the letter wasn’t his and he had never heard of it until now. Historians point out that the letter was in fact written by Uthman’s cousin Marwan who was a relative and an ally of the governor Muawiyah in Damascus what you have to understand here is that the Caliph had no bodyguards or whatsoever. The army was kept in the provinces and on the frontlines of the state and the capable men of the city were on their pilgrimage to Mecca. The only protection the Caliph had were a few local young men posted at the Caliph residence. Among them were the two sons of Ali Hassan and Hussein. The events following the interaction between Uthman and the Egyptian delegation are quite confusing and contradictory. But what happened afterwards is certain as the dispute went on. The situation escalated. The delegation approached the residence of the Caliph for the second time and then someone shot an arrow and killed one of the crowd leaders. The mob was enraged and demanded that the Caliph bring forth the one shot the arrow. Uthman refused to do so stating that he could not betray a person who acted in his defense. The crowd then demanded that the Caliph resign from office. But once again Uthman refused them and instead the Caliph left the talks and retired to his private chambers and did what he always did pray and read the Quran. Outside the crowd overwhelmed with anger and a sense of injustice turned to violence.

They broke down the door of Uthman residence and burst in screaming and there they found Uthman settled in the corner of his study room with a little lamp reading the Quran. At the age of 80 the Caliph of the Muslims was beaten to death by his fellow Muslims. For four days. The angry crowd rampaged through the city streets of Medina. Plundering and looting the citizens of the city. What had started out as a legitimate peaceful delegation through conspiracy a sense of betrayal and injustice turned into a furious mob of rebels who threaten the very core of Islam.

At the end of the fourth day the mob leaders demanded a new Caliph one they could trust or else they would launch a devastating storm of death and destruction throughout the city. The mob gave the citizens of Medina one day to elect a new Caliph. At these turbulent and desperate times all heads turned to one person one person who had been passed over time after time. Some had always called him the prophet’s only legitimate successor. the Muslims of Medina had elected Ali Muhammed son in law as their new caliph initially Ali had refused the honor. But one notable members of the Ummah pledged their allegiance to Ali and begged him to take on the office Ali had no other choice. And so he finally accepted the title of Caliph. The fourth Caliph faced an immense challenge. Ali was tasked with ending the rebellion and restoring justice. And then there were some who were calling for vengeance for the assassination of Uthman. Blood must be answered with blood. The loudest of these voices was that of Muawiyah and the Umayyads who back in Damascus had raised their banners and soldiers.

 Through political intrigue and conspiracy Muawiyah and his Umayyad allies would lead the caliphate to civil war. And essentially and the Democratic structure of the caliphate and forever change Islamic civilization and identity.

This and more we will discuss in part four of the history of Islam and the Islamic political system.

KM

History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System. Part 2

In Part one of the history of Islam. We discussed the succession to Mohammad and the birth of the Caliphate under the leadership of Abu Bakker, the formation of the Holy Father was not an easy one and the newly elected Caliph faced a secessionist rebellion throughout Arabia. He overcame the rebellion, but his reign lasted only for two years. Before Abu Barker’s death. He nominated his trusted military advisor Umar as a candidate for the Caliph, Ummah and the council of elders who are stumped because Abu Bakker and Umar could not be more different. Abu Bakker was the wise and modest grandfather type. He dressed simple and he lived simple. He accumulated no wealth and made every decision together with a council of elders. As a caliph he received only a very small salary. In fact, Abu Bakker continued his trading business just to get by. Sometimes he even milked the cows of the neighbors for extra cash. For all his modesty and humility, he was greatly respected.

Umar on the other hand before his conversion to Islam was known as a drinker and a brawler. He had a notorious temper and he was much taller than most people around him. So, the council wasn’t convinced that Umar was the right person for the office. Then in the heat of the debate Ali stepped forward and endorsed Umar. This Tips the scale of the debates and Umar was elected as the new Caliph. Over the next 10 years Umar would lead the Caliphate. He would conquer the lands of Persia, Mesopotamia, the Levant and Egypt and he would give Islamic civilization its own unique identity.

Umar was a theologian as influential as St. Paul and he was a statesman and a patron of philosophy. Much like Lorenzo de Medici but Umar was also a social reformer like Karl Marx and a military thinker equal to Napoleon. Any of these achievements would have earned him a place in history. But when most people speak of Umar all they know is that he was the second Caliph.

Welcome to our second part of the History of Islam and the Islamic political system. Towards the end of the Ridda wars the Byzantines had moved their main army to the border of the Caliphate and The Sassanids were trying to stir up rebellion in their former proxies which were now part of the Caliphate. Abu Barker believed that either Sassanids or a Byzantine invasion of Arabia was imminent and sent his finest General Khalid Ibn Al-Walid to push back the Sassanids in Mesopotamia and the Byzantines in Syria. we discussed the Islamic conquest of Persia in a part 1.

Even though he was heavily outnumbered. General Al-Walid was decisively victorious in both campaigns but during the military campaigns Abu Bakar had died from a fever. His successor Umar made some military reforms and continued the campaign. Then in the month of September in the year 634 Caliph Umar received news from General Al-Walid. ‘The siege of the Byzantine city of Damascus was over. The caliphate was victorious’.  From that moment onwards the Byzantines were on the defensive and the Muslims were on the offensive. The situation could not be more different with the Sassanids where the Byzantines had withdrawn the Sassanids had continuously attempted to retake their lands in Mesopotamia. Umar argued that the only way the Sassanids would accept peace was by an utter defeat! but a crushing defeat required a full-scale invasion the conquest of Mesopotamia and Syria could be justified as a pre-emptive strike or a response to a provocation. But the invasion of the Persian heartland a foreign land with a foreign religion and foreign customs., There was nothing in the Quran that could justify such an invasion and since it was not Islamic. The all-volunteer Muslim armies would have a hard time keeping a high morale. So, Umar had to come up something he had to find some Islamic reasoning of why the invasion of a foreign land was just. So, he built on the principle. His predecessor Abu Bakker worked on earlier during the wars. The argument was that since there was only one God and Islam was the embodiment of God’s will on earth. Only one ummah or one Muslim community could exist. And since the Ummah represented Islam and lived by the words of the Quran the Ummah was good and peaceful. Anything outside the realm of the ummah that did not live up to the laws of God was considered evil and chaotic. Although there was no mention of this in the Quran early Muslim theologians and jurists and philosophers described two realms in this world. There was the dead El Islam the realm of submission to God and the realm of peace. This was the land of Muslims. Everything else was part of the data harp. This was a realm of war and this realm was viewed as the enemy of humankind and therefore Muslims regarded anyone in the dead Al Herb as infidels and were justified in declaring a jihad against them.

One important thing to understand is that jihad doesn’t actually mean war. It means struggle so you can have an inner jihad to fight your bad habits and urges. But what Umar and the early Muslim scholars did was give the philosophy of jihad a military dimension to justify the invasion of a foreign land. The invasion of Persia. From an early Muslim point of view the military expansions were justified as a struggle of good and justice versus evil and falsehood like white Vs black of a son versus the moon. This was a very ancient philosophy given a legal aspect. The Caliphate had created a legal Islamic way of warfare all in the name to impose God’s will on earth. The moral issue was no longer a concern of the Muslim Army’s view that jihad as a noble act as the new military dimension of jihad combined with some of the finest generals in military history. The Caliphate expanded at an unprecedented rate. The field commander Khalid bin Al-Walid would capture the Levant and destroy the Byzantine army at the Battle of Yarmouk. Commander Amor Bin Al Ahas would March on West and conquer Upper and Lower Egypt and parts of North Africa. Commanders Saud would march east and defeat the Sassanids armies and conquer all of the Sassanids empire including Persia, Azerbaijan and makran. All in all, the Caliphate had conquered an estimated 4,000 cities during the military campaigns! usually in war. Soldiers have the permission to loot and plunder.  But during the reign of Umar the soldiers had no permission to seize the fixed properties of common citizens.

The Muslim armies got the battlefield loot and four fifths of the treasuries of the monarchs they conquered the loot was equally divided amongst the soldiers. There was no distinction between the commander and the foot soldier. The remaining one fifth of the loot went back to the capital Madina. That money was then distributed to the underprivileged through a social welfare system called the ‘Bayt al-mal’. This financial institution distributed an allowance to the poor of the orphans the widows the disabled and even offered child benefits and pensions for the old Muslims and non-Muslims citizens of the Caliphate.

This kind of system was unheard of in ancient times and the Rashudin Caliphate became the very first welfare state. But the crown jewel of all the conquests was the city of Jerusalem which ranks as the third most holy site for Muslims. In fact, one of the most famous march stories takes place after the conquest of the city. The Caliph made his way to Jerusalem to accept the surrender of the city in person Umar traveled with a servant, but they only had one donkey with them and thus took turns riding and walking. When they reached the city walls the servant happened to be riding the donkey. So, the people of Jerusalem mistook him for the Caliph and hastened to pay homage and swear filthy. Eventually the crowd was told it was the other guy. They should be saluting. This kind of anecdotes are plentiful throughout the reign of Umar and attest to the Caliph modesty and humility.

But what happened next is equally important, as Umar entered Jerusalem. The Christian population assumes that the Caliph would want to perform a Muslim prayer and the city’s most holy church as a token of his triumph. But Umar refused to do so. He stated that if he prayed in a church some Muslim ruler in the future would convert a church into a mosque. And that wasn’t the intention of Islam.

The Caliph explained that the local people were free to live and worship as they pleased and that from now on the Muslims would live among them worshipping in their own way and setting an example. Umar explained that if people liked what they saw they were welcome to join the Muslim community. But there was no compulsion in religion. This event set the pattern for the relations between Muslims and the people they conquered. The Christian and Jewish communities in Jerusalem and elsewhere throughout the Caliphate discovered that as non-Muslims they were subject to a special tax called ‘JIZYA’ But the tax was still less than what they had been paying to the Byzantines. Furthermore, unlike the Byzantine rulers who intervened in their practices of sects in their region the Muslim rulers viewed all the indigenous communities as either Christians or Jews from the Muslim point of view. There was no distinction between the sects so there was no reason to intervene in their practices and thus the indigenous communities within the Islamic State had their own laws had their own judges and so enjoyed more freedoms than during the Byzantine rule.

 From the standpoint of the indigenous people of the Caliphate offered a mutually beneficial deal and in fact many Christians and Jews joined forces with the Muslim armies, and this resulted in exceptionally rapid conquests as new areas joined the Islamic State. They also benefited from free trade with other areas in the Caliphate. Prior to this the Byzantines and Sassanids empires-imposed taxes on trade. The difference here was that the Caliphate did not tax trade itself but only wealth. So, from a financial point of view both the Caliphate and the indigenous people prospered by expanding the state. These are all minor reasons but combined they explain how and why the Caliphate managed to expand integrate and convert so rapidly throughout the Middle East.

Over the next few years it became clear that the Caliphate was now an unmatched power in the world. But in order to maintain control over these newly conquered territories massive reforms were requires, the Caliphate proceeded by establishing a political structure that was inspired by the Persian administration. He centralized the government with the Caliph as the head of a sovereign political authority. And then he divided the state into provinces and appointed a governor for every province he hand-picked every governor based on their skill merits and piety. If the Governor misbehaved the caliph had the authority to dismiss him. The provinces were then further divided into districts and every district or large city was governed by a junior governor or Amir. Sometimes the Caliph himself would select the junior governors and sometimes it was the provincial governor who would pick the junior governor.

It is estimated that near the end of Umar’s reign there were 13 provinces and about 100 districts in the Caliphate. The provinces and even a few wealthy districts had their own standing armies with the provincial governors acting as the commander in chief one important side note is that Caliph Umar never selected anyone for a position of authority If that position was close to him or his family no matter how talented or skillful that person was, the Caliph  argued that he had to avoid the seeds of corruption by distancing himself and his family ties from the governance of the state.

But that aside the administrative military and economic reforms, The Caliph made many more religious reforms, if the first caliph Abu Bakker has established that Islam was not just a religion but a social political system. Second Caliph Umar formalized Islamic law which would eventually lead to the creation of Sharia law. When the leave could not find an answer in the Quran, he would consult with the companions of Mohammad to find out what the prophet had done or said in a similar situation. From this Umar started a sorting process in which Mohamed’s revelations and stories were checked double checked and triple checked and then the sources were checked double checked and triple checked. Eventually the scribes were organized into one comprehensive collection from this practice a new institution was established with the sole purpose to study the revelations the stories and examples of Muhammed. This group of scholars was called the ‘ULAMA’ one of the major social institutions of Islam. The scholars who touched on the subject of Islamic jurisprudence known as Fig would have be known as the fogy which means jurists from their fellow jurists who would use the Quran and the suna as major sources for Islamic law. This was fine for a while but sometimes a question or an issue would surface One that was not covered by the Quran or the Suna, and so the jurists had to find other ways of addressing these questions. The jurists achieved that conclusion through several methods. One is the ‘IJima’ which is the consensus of the scholars. The second was through ‘Agijaz’ which is a way of legal acknowledges thinking. These were the most important methods for a jurist, and they were both continuously used by Caliph Umar. For example, when it turned out that the Quran or the suna made no mention of punishment for adulterers Caliph Umar and the jurists noticed that the punishment for adultery did appear in the law of Moses which is punishment by stoning. And so, by the Ijima consensus it was agreed that the same punishment was permissible according to Islamic law. Another example is the punishment for drinking. Once again, the Quran made no mention of punishment for drinking. But Umar argued that a drunk would slander. And since the punishment for slander was of a lash through the just analogy the punishment of lashing could be applied for drinking as well.  to this day The Ijima consensus and used by Islamic legal thinking but since there are many ways of interpreting an analogy and since consensus changes through time there are many differences and disagreements amongst Muslims and religious institutions of what is Islamic and what is not. Another significant change that Umar as the leading jurist put forth was that he took measures to regulate and separate the roles of men and women. He mandated that men and woman should pray separately. Thus, to avoid any sexual thoughts during the prayer ritual later Muslim rulers would form a gorgeous analogy on this principle and from there further separate the roles of women and men based on sexual tensions.

This continued for centuries and it would eventually severely restrict the role of women in the public life. This being said it doesn’t mean that in the Times of early Islam women and men were fully equals. By modern standards. But education was compulsory for both boys and girls. Women worked alongside men and took an active part in the public. Women attended lectures sermons they went to war as relief workers and sometimes even fought side by side with the men Umar himself would frequently be engaged in heated public debates as equals with women as well as men. But despite all this Umar planted the seeds that would over the centuries restrict the participation of women in the public life within Muslim cultures. Another practice that regressed over the centuries was slavery in the seventh century. Slavery was an accepted practice and slavery thrived throughout Arabia. Now the Quran does not ban slavery, but it does set forth restrictions. For one a Muslim could not be a slave of the slave trade could not result in a break ups of a family. So, you could only buy or sell whole families. A master could not abuse or mistreat a slave and a slave had basic rights as the free folks had. For example, a slave had to eat at the table off the master and eat of the same foods. These rulings had been carried to the end slavery might have ended in the Arab world, but it did not. Instead over the centuries Arab societies regressed in this matter and the situation of slavery increased and worsened.

Umar’s own life came to an end when assassinate the Persian slave drove a knife into a stomach at a mosque. Some sources say that the was emotionally disturbed and some sources say that it was a revenge conspiracy by the Sassanids for the Islamic conquest of Persia. Either way at his deathbed Umar made his final political ruling. He established a committee known as a shura whose purpose was to select a new Caliph and seek the approval of the Ummah on the candidacy a democratic body would once again elect the next Caliph. The choice came down to two people Ali who was Prophet Muhammed son in law and Uthman a wealthy merchant from a powerful family and the companion of Mohammed and assembly before the public and the Shura was held. Both candidates were asked a key question. If you become Caliph will you be guided by the Quran, the suna and the precedents set by Abu Bakker and Umar. Ali said yes to the Quran and yes to the Suna. But as for the decisions of Abu Bakker and Umar he answered No. He had a mind of his own and he would consult his own conscience for the decisions. Uthman by contrast answered yes. I’m not an innovator. And so Shura declared Uthman as the new Caliph and the Ummah approved. Ali didn’t believe that Uthman was the right person for the office but unity amongst Muslims was more important than personal achievement for Ali! And so, he took the oath of loyalty during that assembly.

In the 3^rd part of the history of Islam we will talk about the third Caliph Uthman and how he set in motion a series of events that would ultimately lead to the schism between Sunni and Shia Islam.

KM

History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System. Part 1

The core religious allegory of Islam starts with Mohamed’s revelation in the caves and ends with the death of the fourth successor Ali. Almost 40 years later. It is analogous to the last suffer the crucifixion and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In Christianity. And the lifetime of Muhammad his community gained control over the Arabian Peninsula. And though he passed away in 632A.D. the religious story doesn’t end there. But it is continued through his four closest followers Abu Bakker, Umar, Uthman and Ali. Together they formed the Rashidun which means the rightly guided ones! And together they established the first Islamic state. (The Caliphate) in just 30 years the Rashidun Caliphate had conquered all of Persia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Levant and even parts of the Byzantine Empire in Anatolia.

In some ways this new state resembled a democracy. The leaders were all elected by a council of representatives. But the transition of power between these leaders was not an easy one. Thirty years of human drama was first documented by the Arab historian Ibn Ishaq. But most of his work has been lost. However, before it disappeared other scholars and historians quoted from it and summarized from it. The thing is Islam emerged in illiterate times. Historians were writing journals scholars were writing diaries and letters jurists were writing bureaucratic articles from the 7th century onwards. There was a rich record of documents and that’s why we know so many historical details. One historian who used Ibn Ishaq as his major source was the 9th century Persian scholar Muhammad Ibn Jarir Al-tabari.  He collected many of these records and compiled a Chronicle called The History of prophets and kings. It was a 39-volume chronology from biblical figures to ancient empires all the way to nine hundred and fifteen A.D. The historian dedicated an entire volume to a period of just thirty years of human drama. And it all started with the death of a prophet.

The moments the prophet passed away the Muslim community also called the Ummah faced a crisis. The question Rose who our next leader was and what was our next leader. Of the ummah had simply not given the subject any consideration before the death of Muhammad. But they had to come up with something new. The argument was that the new leader could not be a saint because Muhammad had specifically said that he was the last messenger of God but equally important the next leader could not just be another king because the Omar was not just another country, Rather the Muslim community viewed themselves as the embodiment of Islam. In the hours following the death of Muhammad the 60-year-old Abu Bakar our close companion of the Prophet heard rumors that the Muslims from Medina were meeting to elect a leader of their own. Abu Bakar gathered some of the other companions and crashed of the meeting. He begged the Muslims from Medina to reconsider and to elect a single leader for all Muslims. During his speech Abu Bakar pleaded not for a prophet nor for a king but just for one person to call meetings just for one person to moderate discussions. He pointed to two companions of the Prophet saying choose one of these two. One of the appointed Companions was Umar. But in Bedouin Arab culture it is considered unthinkable to take precedence over an elderly man. Umar came forth with tears in his eyes and argued for Abu Bakker as the new leader. The decision was unanimous. Abu Bakker was voted as the first deputy of Muslims better known as the first Caliph!  Nobody really knew what the title meant or what powers it held. So, the first title holder was to fill in those details. For now, Abu Bakker succession was announced, and everyone agreed and cheered. But not everyone was there. One leading candidate did not even hear the issue was being discussed. Mohammed’s cousin Ali was still washing the body of the deceased prophet when he heard that a new leader was elected. You can see how this might have sounded because Ali thought that he was Mohamed’s successor because he was the closest to the prophet and there were numerous reasons why? Ali’s father had actually adopted Mohamed as a son which essentially made Mohamed and Ali Brothers. Mohamed was some 30 years older than Ali and in tribal Arab culture a much older brother had parental status with his siblings. Furthermore, Ali grew up in the household of Mohammed. This meant that Ali was basically like a son of Mohammed at least from the Shia point of view. Equally important is the fact that Ali was the first male to accept Islam. He was the one who risk taking a knife when assassins were coming for Mohammed.  He was there side by side with Mohammed in every battle as Islam spread throughout the peninsula and the Muslim community grew. Mohammad kept Ali close at his side as his right-hand man. In fact, on the way home from his last sermon the prophet held a speech before a crowd of 70,000 to 120,000 people at a place called El-Haddad-Kum in which he said the following. ‘Any of you who consider me your patron should consider Ali your patron’.

Supporters of Shia Islam interpret these words as Muhammad appointing Ali as his heir and successor. Sunni Muslims however interpret the words as Muhammad urging a large audience to hold his cousin and son in law in high esteem and affection. But perhaps the most important factor why Ali was concerned that the heir and successor to the prophet was that Muhammad had no sons the only grandsons he had was from his daughter Fatima who was married to Ali. So many consider Ali’s sons as Muhammad’s grandsons. From a Sunni perspective dynastic succession was not Islamic and Ali’s family ties to the prophet were exactly the kinds of things that they had to prevent from becoming an aristocracy. So, when the prophet passed away Ali was completely neglected. He was not considered a candidate and he was not even consulted. There are two main explanations for what happened next.

According to some sources it took Ali roughly six months to concede the election and those months of the supporters of Abu Bakar threatened the family of Ali. And then one incident resulted in the miscarriage of Fatima. Other sources claim that it took Ali a few days to swear allegiance to Abu Bakker and that the miscarriage of Fatima was an accident.

A dispute like this can never be solved now but it does show that the disagreements between Abu Bakker and Ali eventually transformed into two different sects of Islam the Sunnis and the Shias. In neither case whether it’s six months or six days Ali had conceded the election. What followed shortly afterwards. Was that all over Arabia. The tribes and clans were seceding from their allegiance to Abu Bakar and the capital Medina. Tribal leaders argued that they had never pledged allegiance to Abu Bakar or ummah but only to Muhammad himself. And with the death of the prophet the allegiance was now void. But perhaps the real underlying reason was of the Zakat or the charity tax that their tribes paid to the treasury of Medina. Few tribal leaders even proclaimed themselves as the new prophets! Abu Bakar responded by establishing a new religious doctrine. The idea was that if there is only one God then there must be only one embodiment of Islam. (One Community One Ummah) secession and apostasy was declared to be treason. The time it seemed like a logical short-term solution. But over the centuries this declaration would gradually change Islam to a social political system and not just a religious belief. Within a year the secessionist rebellion was crushed by Khalid Bin Al-Walid. The primary commander and military adviser of Abu Bakar, the caliph had regained control over Arabia and ended the first Islamic civil war also known as the Ridda wars.

What happened next was that a series of provocations by a neighboring Sassanid and the Byzantines resulted in an all-out war between the Rashidun Caliphate, Sassanid Empire and the Roman Empire which were referred to as the Byzantine Empire. The Sassanid were trying to stir up rebellion in the north Arabian regions while the Byzantines moved their troops to the border

of the Caliphate with the intent to conquer the fragmented Arabian region. From a strategic point of view an invasion by either the Byzantine or Sassanid empire was inevitable in the long term. So, Abu Bakker decided to strike first. What you have to understand here is that at the time of the Arabian Peninsula was made up of numerous autonomous tribes the Arabs were doing a lot of trading, spices, cloth and other goods were transported from east to west from north to south, so the Arabs were familiar with the major trading routes and the major religions of the time. But they also understood the logistics and military tactics of their two larger neighbors. And equally importance of the Caliph understood that the sassanids and the Byzantines were exhausted from centuries long warfare. And so, Abu Bakar and his closest advisers and military commanders worked on a strategic campaign that within a few decades would lead to one of the largest empires in history.

Then one August day and the year 634 Abu Bakker after taking a hot bath stepped outside his house into a blast of cold wind. By nightfall he was running a high fever and he knew that death was near. He called the community’s top notables and nominated Umar as his successor. Umar was also a close companion of Mohammad. But he was also a fierce military commander whose appearance, height and temper intimidated the people around him.

So, the council wasn’t convinced that Umar was the right man to lead the ummah. Discussion unfolded and at that critical moment Ali stepped forward and endorsed Umar. His words tip the scales, the ummah had elected their second Caliph. And as soon as Umar took office, he turned towards the military campaign that he and Abu Bakar had worked on earlier. The succession crisis was over. Now it was time for war and conquest.

We shall continue with part 2 This week of the ‘History of Islam, And the Islamic Political System’.

THE WORLD UN-DEFEATED MILITARY GENERAL KHALID IBN AL-WALID.

Genghis Khan. He was the ruler of the Mongol empire.

Thutmose, He was the ruler of the Egyptian empire. 

Darius, He was the ruler of the Persian Empire. 

Alexander, He was the ruler of the Macedonia Empire.

Napoleon, He was the ruler of the French empire.  

Pupienus, He was the ruler of the Roman Empire.  

Julius, He was the ruler of the Republic of Roman Empire.

Shang, He was the ruler of the Chinese Empire. 

Rurik, He was the ruler of the Russian Empire.

Attila, He was the ruler of the Hunik Empire.

Charles, He was the ruler of the Frankish Empire.

And from amongst the companions. There was a solider, there was a commander, there was a conqueror. He crushed all the superpowers of his time. He crushed the Persians Empire, He crushed the Romans, He conquered Iraq, He conquered Iran, He conquered Armenia, He conquered Jordan, He conquered Syria, The undefeated commander the undefeated ruler. The sword from the swords. This was Khalid Ibn Al-walid.  

When you open the books of history, you will come to an Understanding That there have been many gangsters, Mobsters rulers, Generals, Commanders, Conquerors, fighters, warriors, have come and gone. 

Some they were known for their plan of attack. Some, they were known for their ploy, Some, they were known for their tactics, Some, they were known for their Fortitude, Some They were known for their courage, and others, they were known for their Military Expeditions, But Khalid was known for all!

When the Prince of Persia was describing him, He said “That I know more about Khalid bin Al Walid than any one of you, no man is fortunate than he, no man is equal in war than He, be powerful and Strong Or Be weak or pathetic, but they are defeated when Khalid comes in front of them!” 

Again, when the priest of Byanzatine would say “the one standing in this army, is that black one, He is the commander Tall and powerfully Built. With broad shoulders, with a wide Beard and a few spots on his face”

In other wards Khalid Bin Al-walid was considered a black.  

Khalid Bin Al-walid is the only undefeated General in the history of Mankind.  Some book has argued Genghis Khan was undefeated as well. and yes! From the day Genghis Khan got the title of Genghis Khan which means “leader of all” he was never defeated until his death however before he got the title of Genghis he was defeated once by his brother. which means he once lost a battle, at least once! When he was still called “temujin”. Which is not the case with Khalid. 

Khalid never lost any battle, He was victories in over a hundred battles after crushing all the super powers of his time.

He is also remembered for his decisive victories at Yamamah, Ullais, And Firaz and his tactical successes at walaja and yarmouk. 

Khalid fought 200 battles, both major battles and minor skirmishes as well as single duels, During his military career. Having remanded undefeated. He is said to be the one of the finest military generals in history and undefeated.

One of the most celebrated battles of Khalid bin Al-walid. Was the battle of Mu’tah.  In the titled decisive battles, the battle of Mu’tah was said to have been very intense that Khalid bin Walid broke nine swords as he took over the mantle to fight after his army had lost all the 3 main Commanders.  

What was so unique of this battle? In the battle of Mu’tah Khalid army had 3000 infantry and the enemy 200.000. Small as it was, Khalid fought the big army and finally retreated after inflecting a very serious injuries to the enemy’s army! 

He was son of khalid bin Al-walid. He was from the Banu Makhzum tribe. A tribe known for being the most well trialed in arts of war. The Banu Makhzum has the best weapons and lances and spears, this was probably because of the money that they had, and so khalid grew up being trained by fellow people who trained the Banu Makhzum.  He grew up learning how to ride horses using spears and all other artery. 

His first 40 battles each was great than the previous one. In the battle of Chains. He defeated sassanids in spite the small army he had. 

In the battle of Al-walaja khalid Bin walid is credited with one of his most genius moves. This was one of the decisive battles in which the Roman emperor Kisara is sending in one of the largest armies that yet to fight the Arabs. And Khalid bin Walid barely had a third, some books says a fourth and others a fifth of the army of the Persians. Khalid undertakes a tactic that is actually a well-known and we’ll study tactic to this day. The annals of war and the books of history of war actually have a name for this tactic and this is called the “Pincer movement” this Pincer movement is mentioned by many famous military tacticians including Sun Tzu. In sun Tzu art of war. He mentioned this pincer tactic; however, he discourages it as he describes it as one of the most dangerous tactics because it is likely that if you use it your army will flee before the end of the battle. Historically, this tactic has also been used by some of the greatest military Commanders in history of mankind.  Alexander the great used it, Hannibal the conqueror fought against the Romans. He also won using this same tactic “pincer” To-date many books have wrote about this tactic.  And Khalid bin Walid is among those who had perfected it. And he used it in the battle of walaja. Interesting this tactic is taught at Sandhurst, to date.

In a layman terms this move is called Pincer basically because the goal is to pinch the army to spread yourself thin and to encircle or at least pinch the army from multiple sides. This is a huge risk and gamble because in order to do that you have to spread extra thin. So, if you are fortified and you have rows of hundred let’s say to do the Pincer you will have to go down two rows of 20 maybe in other words spreading very thin can increase your causalities that’s why sun Tzu discourages this tactic.

The advantage of use of this tactic is that you’re able to maximize a small group against a larger group and you throw a large group into chaos, because they don’t expect to be attacked from the side. It simply disrupts the layers of an army.  So, this is what Khalid used in this battle and went with a victory.  And since then to date this battle becomes one of the standard battles that has studied to date in many books of histories of battles and war tactics about how to us the Pincer effect to maximum advantages.

Khalid still remembered, His sword is still kept in the museum in Istanbul, Turkey. Unlike other celebrated Generals, Khalid never had statue because After defeating the Muslims in the battle of uhud, He later converted to Islam, And the religion values prohibited the use of statues and creating of them. Which left Khalid with no remembrance statue. Khalid died a natural death, and on his death bed, He was crying asking God to give him a chance to die in battle than on death bed, Khalid liked battles and he was known for his words ‘’I like it on the battle than my wedding night’’.

Khalid is the world undefeated military General of all times.

©Kiberu malik

The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data.

The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data.

A NEW commodity spawns a lucrative, fast-growing industry, prompting antitrust regulators to step in to restrain those who control its flow. A century ago, the resource in question was oil. Now similar concerns are being raised by the giants that deal in data, the oil of the digital era. These titans—Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft—look unstoppable. They are the five most valuable listed firms in the world. Their profits are surging: they collectively racked up over $25bn in net profit in the first quarter of 2017. Amazon captures half of all dollars spent online in America. Google and Facebook accounted for almost all the revenue growth in digital advertising in America last year.

Such dominance has prompted calls for the tech giants to be broken up, as Standard Oil was in the early 20th century. This newspaper has argued against such drastic action in the past. Size alone is not a crime. The giants’ success has benefited consumers. Few want to live without Google’s search engine, Amazon’s one-day delivery or Facebook’s newsfeed. Nor do these firms raise the alarm when standard antitrust tests are applied. Far from gouging consumers, many of their services are free (users pay, in effect, by handing over yet more data). Take account of offline rivals, and their market shares look less worrying. And the emergence of upstarts like Snapchat suggests that new entrants can still make waves.

THE AFRICAN UNION ‘AU’ AND THE NEED OF THE AFRICA UNIFICATION PART 1.

THE AFRICAN UNION ‘AU’ AND THE NEED OF THE AFRICA UNIFICATION PART 1.

The admission of Morocco into the African Union as of January 30th, 2017. The EU now consists of all 55 countries on the continent, based in Addis Ababa Ethiopia. The main goals of the African Union are to promote the unity and solidarity of African states and share their sovereignty and territorial integrity rid the continent of colonialism and apartheid and promote international cooperation with the United Nations through a unified voice of common political social and economic policies. Although the African continent has suffered through an incredibly turbulent and violent past the African Union is emerging as a promising platform to tackle the many issues that faced a rapidly growing continent.

One of the first major steps toward a unified Africa took place in 1945 at the 5th Pan African conference in Manchester. An influential voice of modern Pan Africanism was out of quality and crema of Ghana who at the conference advocated for a United States of Africa, although the idea did not gather widespread appeal at the time. It did help pave the way for the creation of the African Union’s predecessor the Organization of African Unity. Nearly 20 years later in 1963 in which Nkurumah played a vital role although. aspirations were hired uniting a continent so violently divided by colonialism the first year of the oil you gave little hope to maintaining peace in order to make the organization a reality it needed to appeal to the many African autocrats who were fiercely defensive of their post-colonial independence and who were not keen on the idea of sharing any sort of power with their neighbors.

This resulted in the OAU placing emphasis on state sovereignty and adopting a widespread policy of non-intervention of domestic issues which was ineffective and virtually indifferent towards maintaining peace and stability or defending human rights. A prime example of the ineffectiveness of the OAU was the failure to resolve the conflict over Western Sahara which has been in dispute since 1975 after separating from Spain.

The territory which was claimed by both Morocco and the Algerian backed Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic or SDR led to a 15-year long war where control of the region. The initial years of the war lacked any cohesive attempt from the OAU in forming concrete proposals for a resolution to the conflict. The situation deteriorated further when in 1982 the OAU formally recognized and admitted the SDR as a member causing Morocco to withdraw from the organization in protest. It was not until 1991 when the United Nations took a greater role in the crisis that a ceasefire was finally established. However, progress has recently been made with the readmission of Morocco to the African Union which represents a major step towards resolving the Western Sahara dispute and as a sign that the A.U. is becoming a more effective platform for dialogue and cooperation. One of the key shifts in the transition from the OAU to the African Union was that the A.U. aim to become a force for democracy and abandon its past tendency to be as BBC referred to the OAU a dictator’s club! African heads of state are no longer able to ignore democratic principles without fear of intervention from their neighbors. This was no more apparent than in the constitutional crisis of the Gambia. In December 2016 when incumbent President Yahya Jammeh refused to step down after an election loss.

The Economic Community of West African States or ECOWAS which includes the largest African economy Nigeria condemned the actions of Jammeh and demanded that he step down. Although their initial demands were ignored by the president the African Union announced that they offered their full support for the ECOWAS coalition and coordinated the resolution process with the United Nations. When faced with military occupation by neighboring states that were formerly backed by the AU, Jammeh accepted defeat and stepped down in January 2017. This Solidarity in the face of blatant despotism sets a precedent for the African Union and sends a strong message to other would be despots by providing a single unified voice for the entire continent. The African Union legitimizes democratic processes and reinforces the ability of Africa’s many regional blocs like ECOWAS to coordinate security measures and maintain stability. The main body for driving security efforts is the African Union’s Peace and Security Council or PSC established in 2004. The PSC is a body consisting of 15 elected members and is partially modeled after the United Nations Security Council. One initiative of the council is the African peace and security architecture. A comprehensive roadmap to end violence and promote peace on the continent that extends to 2020. This ambitious plan seeks to coordinate security measures with regional blocs combat terrorism like Al-Shabaab in Somalia and be actively engaged in areas of crises such as the Congo, South Sudan and Mali.

There have been positive organizational developments toward security efforts such as early warning systems for nations at risk of conflict which represent a more preventative approach to conflict rather than a reactive one.

Not only is the council seeking to prevent conflict, but it is also expanding its operations towards handling post-conflict reconstruction and development. This is a critical factor in maintaining peace and consists of thorough demobilization and disarmament of actors emerging from conflict while maintaining a consistent collaboration with AU liaisons and regional economic communities.

Although the AU has made significant progress towards peace and stability on the continent one of the biggest challenges, they face is the ability to fund all the operations needed. Currently the union is heavily reliant on outside funding which is generally seen as unsustainable in the long term. In response to a use pushing towards the goal of being completely self-funded and shedding outside influence.

Rwandan President Paul Kagame has been especially vocal about the need for self-funding and laments the fact that the union is 97 percent reliant on outside donors. With less than half of member states paying their dues in full. President Kagame has advocated financing the A.U. through a point two percent tax levy plan on goods imported from outside the continent with some exceptions. His reasoning is that ‘’Once you are the one paying you automatically become more concerned about getting good value for your money’’. Suggesting that AU member states are not financially invested enough in the union and should follow Rwanda’s lead. Not only the self-financing create a greater sense of involvement from member nations but it also allows for more reliable and predictable budgeting. The lack of which is a major obstacle for consistently maintaining long term objectives.

Africa’s economy is large and diverse and as such is broken down into regional blocs known as pillars which collectively make up the overarching organization called the African Economic Community or AEC created in 1991. The AEC aims to gradually integrate the economy of Africa through multiple stages the first stages consisted of maintaining existing economic blocs and creating new ones which have resulted in the myriad of regional communities we have today. The next stages look to build on this foundation by establishing customs unions and free trade areas within all economic regions followed by the creation of an African common market and an eventual transition into a continent-wide integration of all sectors and the adoption of a single African currency. The AU aims to achieve all these goals by 2034.

As of now progress among the individual regions vary wildly and together, they create a complex web of overlapping communities, organizations and trade areas. One reason why advancement in free trade are needed is the fact that of all of Africa’s trade. Only 12 percent of it happens within the continent. This is very low compared to that of Asia which trades around 50 percent with itself and Europe which trades around 70 percent with itself and reflects Africa’s heavy reliance on the rest of the world. Poor infrastructure inhibits the transportation of goods between African nations which is crucial considering the fact that much of the African economy relies on exports of raw goods such as oil metals and minerals making it in many cases easier to trade across oceans than across our own borders.

This also means that greater incentives for Africans to trade with each other would have the added benefit of encouraging infrastructure development which would provide jobs and strengthen economies, landlocked countries deep in sub-Saharan Africa like the Central African Republic would benefit especially so from increased trade, geographically the African interior makes infrastructure development costly and difficult due to thick rainforest in areas like the Congo and being surrounded by plateaus in the south and east. This harsh terrain combined with the lack of sea ports means that local trade and infrastructure investments is essential for the overall development of inner African nations.

Africa is a sleeping giant and the African Union’s efforts at creating a more peaceful stable and economically united continent will result in massive growth over the next century. By 2050 Africa’s population is projected to double from 1.2 to 2.4 billion people and contain one quarter of the world’s population while its GDP is expected to quadruple from around 2 Trillion dollars to 8 trillion dollars.

Nigeria alone is even expected to surpass the United States in population within the same timeframe. As Africa grows it will become an increasingly important and influential player on the world stage and will need to have a unified voice If it is to effectively pursue its global interests. The African Union provides both a platform for that voice to be heard and the forum for the international cooperation that will make this growth possible in the first place, driving a collective effort at ensuring security and promoting economic development across the continent.

This was the first part of our 4 series writings about Africa the sleeping giant and a need of a strong African Union.

Kiberu Malik

Member of the Caspian Report.

IS CHINA BUYING OUT EUROPE?

IS CHINA BUYING OUT EUROPE?

For over a decade,Chinese political and corporate leaders have been hunting for investmentopportunities around the globe with bottomless wallets.  From Asia, To Africa,the U.S and Latin America, China has asserted itself as an emerging worldpower. 

The multimillionDollar belt and Road initiative with some have called as the Chinese Marshall plan, is designed to encourage economic connectivity and integration to theEurasia Strategic Landscape, by linking Europe and Asia by land. Europe is a key piece in China’s grand ambitions and China has been significantly expanding its economic footprint in Europe. So much so that it has led the EU to devise acounter-strategy in order to prevent the creation of political and financial dependencies. 

Today we are looking at China’s Investments in Europe. 

Since 2008, the landscape of Chinese foreign direct investments in the European Union has changed dramatically. From $840m invested in 2008, China annual foreign direct investment in Europe grew to $42 billions in 2017. According to a recent compilation by Bloomberg, total Chinese Investment in Europe, including both mergers and acquisitions and green field investments amounts to $318 billion, 45% more than chines investment in the U.S between 2008 and 2017. 

China has taken over approximately 360 European companies. In the first six months of 2018, research by global law firm Baker McKenzie found that the value of newly announced Chinese merger and acquisition in Europe hit $22 billions by the mid-point of the year, nine times higher than in North America where it was just $2.5 billion. 

China’s Investments are geographically spread across Europe, although the largest European economies, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany and France, attract the largest share of Chinese capital. Among China’s iconic investments in Europe is the Hinkley point nuclear plant in Southern England, which is 1/3 funded by China. For over a decade now, the city of London has been a magnet for Chinese cash as Beijing tries to build its currency, the Yuan into a world currency. 

By large, the Chinese money has been going into real estate and finance, with Chinese state banks well represented and active in the bond market and the international exchange market. Chinese citizens represent almost half of the investor visas the UK granted in 2017, out numbering Russians the next largest group of investors visa recipients, By 250%. Despite the largely uncertain future of the UK as a market once it exists the EU, China is betting on the British capital as an emerging hub of Chinese finance. 

In Germany, China’s Investments started with the purchase of family run industrial companies, such as machine-tool maker Putzmeister in 2010, and continued with the Chinese company Medea’s acquisition of robotic company KUKA in 2016 for $5.2 billion. 

More recently, a Chinese investor’s $1 billion acquisition become the top shareholder of Daimler AG which is the 13th largest car manufacturer and is the largest truck manufacturer in the world. German debate over Chinese foreign direct investments, has intensified since the launch in 2015 of china’s made in China 2025 strategy, A national plan that aims to make the country a champion in key high-tech industries such as aerospace, robotics, and artificial intelligence. Many Chinese companies have eyed up German Companies with the goal of acquiring technologies and orchestrating transfers of these technologies. 

In Italy, China’s silk road fund helped china national chemical corporation, also known as ChemChina buy tyre maker pirelli in 2015 for $7.7 billion. ChemChina has also acquired a string of industrial and energy related companies. 

In the EU’S immediate neighborhood, Switzerland has captured the lion’s share of Chinese foreign direct investment with ChemChina’s acquisition of Syngenta, one of the world’s largest agribusiness conglomerates. The deal was finalized in 2018 for $46 billion, making it the world’s single largest acquisition by a Chinese company. 

The islands of Cyprus and Malta both full EU members states, are throwing open the gates to chines investors, especially in finance and real estate. Both have also become strong supporters of china. 

Then there are the cases of Greece and Portugal, two southern European countries that together account for a modest 2.5% of the EU’s GDP in 2017. China has become a key investor in Greece, mainly through a central investment project. In 2016 a Chinese state-owned corporation, China Ocean shipping Company, took over 67% of Athens Piraeus Harbor. China has signaled that it intends to us this port as the main platform for its maritime Silk Road, part of Beijing’s Belt and Road initiative. Most Chinese Companies are now using Piraeus as their principal port entry into southern Europe. Visiting China in 2016 Prime minister Alexis Tsipras declared that Greece intends to serve as China’s gateway into Europe. 

To the west, Portugal has become a key recipient of Chinese investment. Perhaps capita, it is one of the largest in Europe. During a Euro’s regional crisis in 2011, the Lisbon government was under pressure from the European commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, the so-called troika to sell stress assets. China stepped forward to offer foreign investment. As part of the bailout China Three Gorges bought 26% of EDP, and style Grid Corp of China bought a stake in Portugal power distributor, REN-Redes Energetics, a privately-owned Shanghai based company, controls the Portugal’s largest insurer, Fidelidade, and a group of private hospitals. 

The list of Chinese Investments seems endless, but does any of this translate into political influence? 

According to Thomas Wright, the director of the center on the United States and Europe at Brookings Institute, the Chinese leaderships seeking of political influence in EU is driven by two interlocking motivations, ensuring regime stability at home and presenting its political concepts as a competitive way to political and Economic governance to a growing number of third countries. Unlike the current Russian government, Beijing is interested in a stable, but pliant and Fragmented, EU and the largest and integrated European single market that underpins it. Properly managed, the Chinese leadership has concluded parts of Europe can be useful conduit to further its interests. 

Politically, it is seen as a potential counterweight to the U.S, one that is even more easily mobilized in the Era of the Trump administration administration’s America First approach. 

Beijing is also acutely aware that Europe has many assets like technology and intellectual property, which China needs for its industrial upgrading, at least in those domains in which it has not yet established its own technological leadership. The EU is also useful as a legitimizer of Chinese global political and economic activities, such as the belt and Road initiative. Beijing purses three relates goals.

-first is aimed at building support among third counties like EU member states on specific issues and policy agendas, such as gaining market economy status from the EU or recognition of territorial claims in south China Sea.  Apart of this short-term goal is to build a solid network among European politicians, businesses, media, think tanks and universities. Thereby creating layers of active support for Chinese interests. 

Recent Chinese attempts to discourage individuals EU countries from taking measures that run against Chinese interests, such as supporting a coordinated EU response to China’s territorial claims in south China Sea, meeting with the Dalai Lama, or criticizing Beijing’s human rights records, are cases in point.

– According to Thomas Wright, the second related Goal is to weaken western unity, both within Europe and across the Atlantic. Beijing realized early on, that dividing the U.S and the EU would be crucial to isolating the US, countering western influence more broadly, and expanding its own global reach. China senses that a window of opportunity to pursue its goals has opened, with the trump administration seen as withdrawing from the role as guardian of the liberal international order that the U.S has long played.  This comes in addition to the challenges western liberal democracies faces from the rise of illiberal-authoritarians’ political movements.  

– The third goal is broader in terms sense of making the world safe more China’s autocratic model. This means creating a more positive global perception of china and presenting its political as well as economic system as a viable alternative to liberal democracies. In large part, this is motivated by china’s continued fear of the appeal of so-called western ideas like liberal and democratic values. From the vantage point of Beijing, European and western soft power has always had a sharp, aggressive edge, threatening the Chinese regime.  At the same time, this goal is based on the idea that as China rises in economic and military terms, it should command more respect in the court of global public opinion. Activities geared towards long term shifts in global perception include improving China’s global image through measures like media cooperation, making liberal democracy less popular globally by pointing out real or alleged inefficiencies in democratic decision-making processes, and supporting illiberal tendencies in European countries. 

Given the rapidity of China’s economic development in the past 30 years it has taken the EU some time to acknowledge the growing power and influence of Beijing. Not only has china become a trading giant, it sits on the world’s largest currency reserves and is an increasingly important provider of foreign investment including in Europe.  Recently however, a number of developments have generated a sense of caution among European politicians and Policy makers. 

On 19th September, The EU published its much-anticipated strategy to counter China’s increasing economic influence in Europe. China’s refusal to tackle the dominant position of its state-owned enterprises led the EU to refuse to grant china market economy status. Beijing’s targeting of European technology has also led to plans for screening of Chinese Investments in Europe. But it was the massive infrastructure investments under BRI that raised concerns in Brussels, as well as Washington, Delhi and other capitals about the implications of China’s approach. 

In the spring of 2018 EU ambassador in China penned a report critical of the BRI for being economically, environmentally, socially and financially unsustainable. It also criticizes China for discriminating against foreign businesses, the lack of transparent bidding processes and the limited market access for European business in China. China’s involvement in the EU and its neighborhood also rang warning bells. In 2014, Montenegro concluded an agreement with China Exim Bank on the financing for 85% of a highway construction project, with the estimated cost equaling 25% of the country’s GDP.  The IMF has repeatedly stated that construction should only continue on the basis of concessional funds, many believe that a debt default is likely, which may result in the involuntary handover of critical infrastructure to China. Likewise, China’s entire or partial acquisition of ports in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy and most notably Greece has not gone unnoticed. Without serious hindrance, China is buying up critical infrastructure in Europe, whereas European foreign direct investment in China is decreasing. China has already reaped some political benefits from these investments with some member states blocking resolutions critical of human rights in china or condemning Beijing’s conduct in south China Sea.  Similarly, European officials have also questioned the environmental and economic sustainability of various Chinese connectivity projects. The planned construction of six coal-based power plants in Pakistan whose joint output capacity equals 27% of the country’s current capacity has been criticized as environmentally unsustainable.

Sri Lanka has been unable to repay Chinese loans for the construction of the Hambantota port. As a result, the port and surrounding acres of land, strategically located at the crossroads of the Indian ocean, the Bay of Bengal and the Arabia Sea, will now be under Chinese control until year 2114. 

Malaysia and Myanmar are also seeking to renegotiate loans taken out under the BRI. These examples have increased EU concerns as China has expanded its influence in Asia, central Asia and Europe. But the EU is well aware that mere Peer pressure would not drive china to reconsider its strategy. To secure it’s political and economic interests, the EU had to put forward an ambitious and comprehensive response, which was to strengthen its own links with the host counties and to present them with a credible and sustainable alternative offer for connectivity financing. The new strategy will give Asian and European states a much clearer idea on the bases of which the EU wishes to engage with them, and what they can expect. Although some financing is mentioned in the EU pape, we will have to wait and see how the ongoing negotiations for the next EU budget will be in allocating sufficient EU funds to connectivity financing in order to mobilize additional investment for private and multilateral investors. 

The EU strategy will also need United support from member states, a solid public communication strategy, and bored bi and multilateral outreach programmers to the EU partners.

The geopolitical competition in Eurasia will undoubtedly increase with china, Russia, the U.S. and the EU all competing for influence the connectivity strategy of the EU has set down a marker that the EU is part of the Great Game. 

The future ahead!

©Kiberu malik

Member of the Caspian report research desk.