A New Economy for the Muslim World

Thursday, June 23rd, 2011 | Posted by Syawal

With the revolutions in the Muslim world in full swing and now spreading from North Africa to the Middle East Western nations are attempting to hijack the Ummah’s demand for change and labelling the protests as demands for democracy, freedom and Western values. It should be remembered that those informing us of what the ummah demand are the very same countries that constructed the architecture the ummah is working to remove.

David Fromkin, Professor and expert on Economic History at the University of Chicago explained in his 2009 book ‘A peace to end of peace: the fall of the Ottoman empire and the creation of the modern middle east,’ how the West constructed the Middle East: “Massive amounts of the wealth of the old Ottoman Empire were now claimed by the victors. But one must remember that the Islamic empire had tried for centuries to conquer Christian Europe and the power brokers deciding the fate of those defeated people were naturally determined that these countries should never be able to organize and threaten Western interests again. With centuries of mercantilist experience, Britain and France created small, unstable states whose rulers needed their support to stay in power. The development and trade of these states were controlled and they were meant never again to be a threat to the West. These external powers then made contracts with their puppets to buy Arab resources cheaply, making the feudal elite enormously wealthy while leaving most citizens in poverty.“

Whilst we are all familiar with problems across the Muslim world, be they economic, social or legal, the Muslim world does not lack the building blocks for economic development and prosperity. British Prime Minister Henry Bannerman in 1906 confirmed that “There are people (the Muslims) who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another … if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state; it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world.

Many from the Ummah have braved the brutal crackdown by their rulers and came onto the streets in the hope of a new dawn. The removal of the rulers is the first aspect of this struggle, the second aspect would be the construction of a new order that placed the ummah at the centre rather then a ruling family or foreign power. Central to this is establishing an economic system that changes the current status quo where the majority languish in poverty and the minority treat the regions wealth as their personal wealth. In order to achieve this we would need to ascertain our strengths and advantages, whilst those elements considered necessary but absent would need the development of policies so they can be overcome.

An example of this is China, after a number of failures to develop the nation, beginning in 1979 Chinese technocrats led by reformers created various economic zones to attract foreign technology to deal with the lack of advanced industry. The use of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), although greatly aided economic activity and job creation, it also allowed for foreign technical and managerial knowledge into China. This is why to this day all foreign companies in China are forced to transfer technical knowledge to China for access to the Chinese domestic market. In this way China has been able to achieve phenomenal economic growth, develop its military and created jobs for millions of its citizens.

Similarly Japan by the turn of the 20th century had managed to develop its industries, however the rapid growth of the economy had made Japan painfully aware of its limited natural resources. Japan overcome such disadvantages through a programme of aggressive territorial expansion through conquering the Korean peninsula and surging deep into China in order to exploit labour and resources. In a similar manner the British Empire conquered foreign territories for export markets and utilised slave labour to overcome small workforce.

These examples show that all nations need some very basic ingredients to emerge as powerful nations and ones that can very quickly establish prosperous standards of living for its people with secure borders. When we look at the Muslim world we find whilst it is blessed with the worlds energy sources – oil and natural gas, this has not been used to develop industry, which would allow it to create millions of jobs and secure its borders. The development of infrastructure, defence industries and energy are fundamental for any nation, the possession of mineral resources would place any nation in a strategic position to develop. The examples of Japan and Britain are examples of societies – rightly or wrongly, who overcame the absence of energy sources in order to develop.

When one looks at the potential of the Muslim world, the Muslim lands do not just posses the key building blocks for a new nation, but over and beyond this reality the Khilafah would emerge a very powerful state due to the many strengths it will inherit that are present in the Muslim lands.

The Muslim Ummah collectively possesses over 700 billion barrels of oil and half of the world’s gas. Both the worlds key energy sources. The Ummah globally number 1.6 billion, more importantly over 60% of the Ummah is below the age of 28. The importance of a large population is critical for domestic economic development. The absence of a large pool of labour means a nation cannot be constructed or in many cases would take decades before it was able to become self sufficient. On the emergence of the Khilafah for the defence of its borders the Khaleef will have the capability to deploy armed forces of over 4 million personnel.

The Khilafah would use its immense energy as a tool to bring technology and expertise to the Muslim lands. Rather than making the priority to provide to the international markets as the current rulers do, the Khilafah would make bilateral treaties with energy consumers around the world based on the benefit they can provide to the Muslim lands. Countries such as Japan and Germany could be provided with oil in return for technology.

A cursory glance across the Muslim world shows that the current Muslim nations fall into two camps regarding manufacturing, there are those nations which already have the characteristics of an industrial base, which are the minority of nations and then there is the majority of the Muslim world that lack heavy industry. This can be overcome through expanding manufacturing with the nations that have some industrial base and then linking the nations that do not have much industry with specific types of industry to the nations which have an industrial advantage.

The creation of heavy industry and its supportive industries will bring with it a massive injection of investment from the state and from industrialists. The State will oversee the creation and conversion of many factories which will brings opportunities not heralded before. This will be coupled with private investment from entrepreneurs keen to capitalize on the returns that will be generated. This policy will create jobs for those previously unemployed. The creation of jobs will naturally increase consumption as people will possess greater amounts of income. This in turn will increase demand for goods from the general masses. Such an increase in aggregate demand will push the development of other sectors of the economy such as the consumer goods sector. This demand will push people to supply these goods further creating more jobs and more wealth in the economy

The Islamic economic system when implemented focuses on wealth distribution, Islam views wealth creation as a technical matter, hence where an oil refinery should be constructed, whether manual labour or an automated process using robots should be used to make automobiles are seen as technical issues which can be concluded by understanding their reality. How such cars or a nations wealth should be distributed, should it go to the orphans or aristocracy is something that the reality cannot explain, hence for this area Islam has laid down a system.

Through the application of Islam’s economic rules sustainable economic growth can be achieved that all can share in. Islam’s taxation policy which focuses on wealth rather than income will leave citizens with much more disposable income. Islam does not have complex rules for taxation and has only seven revenue sources for the state, in this way the rules for taxation are much simpler, cheaper to administer and all citizens know where they stand.

This is just an insight on what Islam offers the Muslim world. There is only reason for why the Ummah remains in its current state and this is due to the rulers over the Muslim lands, who have never had any intention of making the right use of the huge wealth in the Muslim lands. The West have attempted to integrate the Muslim lands into their own domestic markets though policies such as the free market and globalisation and whilst they receive cheap oil and cheap labour the Muslim lands have gained nothing in terms of economic development. Countries such as Egypt went from being self sufficient in agriculture to today being a net importer. The Muslim lands posses all the necessary ingredients to take its own destiny into its own hands, it also possesses a way of life that will guide it in using such resources, it now just needs to fulfil its destiny and throw its rulers into the dustbin of history.

Source www.aljunnah.com

Al-Azhar’s declaration: A new leap into politics?

JUNE 30, 2011

Al-Azhar’s recently declaration backing a democratic civil state has triggered questions over the political role that the world’s oldest and most prestigious Sunni institution might play in post-Mubarak Egypt.

After deliberations with fellow clerics and intellectuals with different political and religious leanings, Al-Azhar Grand Imam Ahmed al-Tayyeb last week issued an 11-clause document declaring the institution’s official position on the prospective political order.

The statement envisions a “modern” and “democratic nation-state” based on a constitution that ensures full separation among the different branches of government and guarantees equality for all citizens. The document also calls for respecting freedom of thought and opinion and voices support for human rights, including children’s and women’s rights.

“This is more of a revolutionary change in the relationship between religion and the state on one hand and Al-Azhar and public life on the other,” said Georges Fahmi, a PhD candidate with the European University Institute, who recently wrote a dissertation on the role of Egypt’s religious institutions in politics.

By using the phrase “modern nation-state,” Al-Azhar dealt a blow to Islamist voices that call for the revival of the pan-Islamic caliphate, said Fahmi. Also, by affirming the state should derive legitimacy from a constitution that the people design, Al-Azhar is distancing itself from some Islamist political movements, which holds Shariah, or Islamic Law, as the constitutional foundation of any Muslim society, added Fahmi.

Another controversial assertion in the charter, according to Fahmi, is the reference to “the general principles” of Shariah, rather than the strict injunctions of Shariah – stoning or decapitating adulterers, for example. By referring to general principles of Shariah, Al-Azhar is providing room for a modern interpretation of Islamic values such as freedom, justice, and equality, rather than citing specific articles in the traditional Islamic penal code.

“The document comes at a juncture where three forces are struggling over Egypt’s identity,” said Fahmi, referring to Islamists, civil parties, and a third, more minor group composed of die-hard secularists that renounces Islam altogether. The second group recognizes the principles of Shariah but does not subscribe to a literal, rigid implementation.

“With this document, he [the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar] is backing the civil bloc that wants a modern and civil state which derives its principles from Islam,” said Fahmi, who believes that in return, Tayyeb expects these civil forces to back his fight against conservative clerics who remain an impediment to reforming the religious establishment.

The Egyptian Social Democratic Party, which belongs to that civil bloc, had issued a statement welcoming Al-Azhar’s declaration as “an important step” that put the nation on the right track toward “progress.”

However, not all Islamists met the declaration with the same fervor. Hardline Islamist lawyer Mamdouh Ismail, who is in the process of founding the Egyptian Renaissance Party, refused to comment on it.

“I will not comment on anything issued by Al-Azhar as long as it is not independent and remains headed by a person who was a member [of Mubarak’s National Democratic Party],” said Ismail in reference to Tayyeb.

In 2010, Tayyeb was appointed grand imam after the death of Mohamed Sayyed Tantawi. His open-mindedness, tolerance, exposure to the West and staunch opposition to radical interpretations of Islam raised hopes that he would spearhead genuine reform inside the religious establishment. However, he had reportedly encountered strong resistance from hawkish scholars.

“Tayyeb has read the moment well…The next step will be to use the backing that he gets from society to reform Al-Azhar,” Fahmi anticipated.

Since the beginning of the 20th century, Al-Azhar has been a bastion of moderate Islam in the Sunni world. However, its influence has been waning since former President Gamal Abdel Nasser sought to clip its wings.

In 1952, Nasser’s regime abolished the family waqf (endowments) and then public endowments, stripping the clerics of their financial independence. A few years later, he brought Al-Azhar under the direct control of the state. The grand imam was no longer elected by his fellow clerics but appointed by the president. In the meantime, Nasser utilized Al-Azhar to bestow legitimacy on his pan-Arab and socialist policies.

The same pattern was maintained by President Anwar Sadat, who came to power in 1970. Sadat further weakened Al-Azhar by opening the door for radical Islamist groups, which promoted Wahhabi thought.

“It was these ideological newcomers that delivered the most debilitating blow to the religious foundations of al-Azhar, the ancient and long pre-eminent Sunni religious establishment whose Ash’ari [predominant Sunni Islam school of thought] theological traditions are famously open to multiple views of Islamic law and are tolerant of Sufism,” Hossam Tamam, an expert on Islamist groups, wrote in a 2010 article.

“As a result, the real decline of Al-Azhar dates to the early 1970s when it began to lose ideological influence in the face of the Wahhabi tide…” wrote Tammam.

After Mubarak held the helm of state, Al-Azhar kept losing its influence to radical groups, which sought to discredit the state-sanctioned religious establishment by arguing that it represented the regime’s interests rather than true Islam. Meanwhile, this same Wahhabi thought had permeated Al-Azhar itself, continued Tammam.

Whether Tayyeb’s charter constitutes a leap in Al-Azhar thought is a contested question. For prominent reformist scholar Gamal Qotb, the document is a mere attempt at “window-dressing.”

“Now we have to ask, does the content of this document reflect on the curriculum that Al-Azhar students are taught? Actually, it has nothing to do with it,” Qotb, a former head of Al-Azhar’s Fatwa Committee told Al-Masry Al-Youm in a phone interview.

Meanwhile, Qotb criticized the statement for failing to focus on mechanisms for reform.

“Only in two vague and ambiguous clauses the document talks about the independence of Al-Azhar,” said Qotb, who has been promoting a precise and elaborate reform project since the 1980s. Yet, he complains that his project remains ignored.

To Qotb, a genuine reform of Al-Azhar is the best way to safeguard against radical Islamist groups.

“All [Islamist] groups emerged during the 20th century to compensate for the weakness of Al-Azhar. If Al-Azhar becomes strong and rational again, people will get away from all [Islamist] groups,” he said.

Yet, he questioned the ability of incumbent religious leaders including Tayyeb and Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa to bring about reforms given their shaken credibility. Both clerics had held close ties with the Mubarak’s regime and their opposition to the revolution has discredited them in the eyes of many Egyptians.

“How would he [Tayyeb] bring about liberalism or democracy? Do Tayyeb’s and Gomaa’s practices and statements during the revolution carry any indications that they might be able to run things in the next phase?” Qotb asked rhetorically.

The last two clauses of Tayyeb’s document emphasize the need to ensure Al-Azhar’s full independence from the government, to have top clerics elect its imam rather than give the president authority to appoint one, to modernize the curricula and to give Al-Azhar the exclusive authority to decide religious matters. In the meantime, the document gives the right to non-Azhar scholars, with enough credentials, to voice opinions on faith-related issues.

According to Hazem Kandil, a lecturer on political sociology, it is important to specify these credentials in order to de-legitimize ill-trained preachers who have monopolized the religious sphere.

“Al-Azhar should specify those credentials because this issue poses major problems,” said Kandil. “With the deterioration of Al-Azhar, people with no credentials came to the fore and talked about religion in audio cassettes and on satellite TV channels and people have been listening to them. They were either affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Salafis or belonged to no organization.

“Al-Azhar should make it clear that scholars who hold al-Alemeyya, the Al-Azhar equivalent of a PhD degree, or any of its equivalents from a foreign university, are the only ones eligible to preach,” contended Kandil.

Al-Masry Al-Youm

Source www.hizb.org.uk

Afghanistan’s banking crisis is legacy of Western occupation

JULY 1, 2011

With the American redefinition of the Afghan war being announced by President Obama last week some in Afghanistan may think they can now breathe a sigh of relief. After all, the occupying force is leaving, albeit there will still be many thousands of American contractors remaining in the country, but it is it the beginning of the end.

Those who know anything about American foreign policy over the last hundred years will understand that the effects of occupation last well beyond the time final solider heads for home. Colonialism by its very nature is about economic, political and social hegemony and not just physical military occupation.

Afghanistan is a country that has not really known peace for more than a century, let alone the last decade. A constant state of war and fighting has gripped the mountain land. The recent attack on the intercontinental Hotel is just once legacy of American occupation. The fact that two former bank chiefs are on trial for their part in the failure of the Kabul Bank may to seem on the surface like progress, corruption can only be redressed with the strength of the law.

Just like the Western world where greedy bankers were blamed for the near collapse of a number of high profile banks, Sherkhan Farnood and Khalilullah Ferozi stand accused of allowing Kabul Bank to get to the point of near failure; it was eventually rescued by a bail-out from the Afghan Central Bank. Prosecutors have also issued an arrest warrant for Abdul Qadeer Fitrat a former governor of the Central Bank. It has been reported that Firat resigned his position and fled to the US because he feared for his life after exposing other frauds involving high ranked officials including the brother of President Hamid Karzai. The entire Afghan banking sector is currently one big mess.

The accusations against the three include corruption, issuing of unauthorised loans worth hundreds of millions of dollars and the unauthorised printing of money. The kind of activities a more common to a banana republic, a category Greece has recently joined.

As Greece is finding out the Economy of any nation is pivotal to its future strength and success otherwise you are left at the behest of the IMF sharks who will dictate policy that will lead to ruin. The crisis at Kabul Bank is just a taste of what is to come under the capitalist banking model which is being implemented in Afghanistan. Even a strong political leadership and stronger regulation would never be able to stop the banks playing roulette with ordinary peoples money, the banking bust in the UK has clearly shown this. The troubles at Kabul Bank have put into jeopardy the salaries of teachers, those in the army and policeman in an already poverty ravaged country.

Hamid Karzai for his part is putting the blame squarely on ‘foreign advisors’ for creating the crisis however it is more than advice that is the problem here, it is the attitude of ‘copy-and-paste’ economics. Afghanistan is indicative of the kind of problems which plague the wider Muslim world.

Despite everything that is occurring in the heart of the liberal world there is still a longing desire (amongst the ruling elite) to be like the ‘West’, maybe it is because there is a quick buck to be made.

Long after the last NATO solider leaves Afghani soil (if they ever do) and long after the names of the three F’s Farnood, Ferozi and Fitrat are but a distant memory the disaster that capitalism creates will live on.

Corruption and mismanagement is just a by-product of Western banking practice, in the West it is called ‘white collar crime’ in the East they simply call a thief a thief.

Only a move towards and the implementation of the Islamic economic system via the Khilafah will improve the lives of ordinary Muslims in Afghanistan. Until then the Muslims will be occupied physically, economically and politically by the failed systems and ideology of the colonial powers.

Source: www.hizb.org.uk