Praise be to Allah, who created us as His vicegerents on earth and then honored us by making us an ummah, who takes us by the hand and lifts us up whenever we fall. Blessings and peace be upon His Messenger, who, through the hardships he endured day and night, formed a robust community and encouraged us with the glad tidings of this ummah’s bright future. I begin with salutations to my brothers and sisters who shoulder the troubles of the Muslims and strive to revive the ummah.
In the previous issue I started to explain why the deceitful, two‑faced Western imperialists—who pretend to favor democracy yet have erected dictatorships in the Middle East and supported those dictators for a century—behave this way and why they established monarchies in the region. I focused on two reasons.
First: Because dictators lack popular support, they must always rely on and submit to the powers that brought them to office. They know very well what awaits them if they do not comply: sanctions, a coup by one of their own generals, or a provoked public uprising. Aware of this, the dictator bends double before the superpowers and does whatever they demand. For this reason Western powers always prefer dictators in the Islamic world.
Second: Dictators keep their countries backward. People who do not feel free and who live under constant pressure become lazy and lose their entrepreneurial spirit; a lethargic society inevitably falls behind. Moreover, where there is dictatorship, oppression and intimidation prevent anyone from speaking of injustices, theft, and tyranny. Consequently, the factors that materially and morally destroy a society multiply daily. Thus the state grows weak, and the nation loses its character. Western imperialists can exploit such countries and silence all objections only when those countries are ruled by dictatorship. That is why Western powers favor dictatorships and dictators in the Middle East.
The third reason they installed dictatorial systems in the Islamic world is that only through dictatorships and monarchies could they halt Islamic movements with the potential to flourish in the region. Like the polytheists of Mecca who fashioned an idol out of halva, worshiped it, praised it, and then ate it when hungry, Western imperialists abandon the “religion” they have made of democracy whenever it no longer serves them, and they begin supporting dictators. In a sense they are compelled to act this way and fall into this contradiction. For Islam, by its very nature, seeks to rule and will not consent to be ruled. Knowing this, Western—or Western‑oriented—powers must themselves become dictatorial and back dictators so that they, not Islam, may rule.
Islam desires to rule, and that is its right, for Islam is from Allah, and Allah is the Creator, Sustainer, and Governor of the universe. Can it be imagined that Allah, who leaves nothing without a purpose and sets laws for everything, would leave humankind—whom He created as His vicegerent—without guidance, especially after charging humans with building a world and a civilization as Allah wills? The Qur’an declares, “Does man think that he will be left uncontrolled, without purpose?”¹—affirming that Allah has laid down laws for humanity and that it is impossible for people living in Allah’s world to live as they wish; they must follow the laws Allah has set for them.
The Qur’an states why it was revealed: “Indeed, We have sent down to you the Book in truth so that you may judge between people by what Allah has shown you.”² In other words, this Book did not come merely to offer advice but to guide and govern human life.
Islam is not a faith devoid of law, reduced to mere belief, like Christianity, which was later corrupted by Paul, its sharia abolished and secularized. Islam is Allah’s religion that legislates on everything pertaining to life: it prescribes duties and prohibitions, contains a penal code for crimes, lays down rulings on trade, inheritance, marriage, and divorce, and even sets laws concerning war, peace, and international relations. It has left no sphere of individual, familial, or social life unregulated. Here lies the crux of the problem for Westerners. Christianity, their religion, was rendered sharia‑less by Paul; therefore, it does not meddle in state, politics, or daily life and offers only moral counsel—so no conflict arises between religion and state. But as I have noted, because Islam possesses laws for every aspect of life, conflict arises in every domain between Islam and a secular state.
The Muslim peoples of the Middle East want Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to have His say in their lands, to live as He commands, to obey Allah rather than servants, to reclaim their glorious past civilization, and to be freed from the Western way of life. Middle‑Eastern Muslims proclaim tawhīd and yearn for liberation. Because of this, the Westerners are compelled to impose dictatorship and rigid secularism in the region to stop Islam and Islamic movements. So long as we do not adopt and internalize secularism and so long as we lack a secular understanding of religion, the West will not allow democracy in the Middle East; they will continue to support kings and coup leaders.
In Turkey, the recent shift from rigid secularism to a strategy of “mild secularism” stems from the fact that, after roughly 80–90 years of revolutions, executions, and coups, the Muslim population has partly forgotten the real meaning of tawhīd, and secularism has become somewhat entrenched. America’s designation of Turkey as a “model country” for Middle‑Eastern states is for the same reason: they perceive no serious Islamic threat in Turkey and see that many communities—even many Islamic ones—find secularism acceptable, no longer aspire to rebuild Islamic civilization, and have been molded into a form conciliable with Western civilization. Hence they permit a little more freedom in Turkey.
Some Islamic groups may reject secularism yet advocate democracy. They should know that Westerners and their local allies will not accept this; they will not grant freedom to societies that they have not secularized. Therefore, attempting to separate democracy from secularism is futile; in Western eyes the two are inseparable. Those who champion democracy must reckon with eventually embracing secularism. Essentially, this is not merely a forecast but today’s reality: many communities now have no issue with secularism.
The “mild secularism” project follows—and is a result of—the “moderate Islam” project. First they mellow the Muslims; then they themselves adopt a mellow secularism. Just as the Qur’an says: “So do not obey the deniers. They wish that you would compromise, and then they would compromise (with you).”³ They first want you to soften, to flatter them, to become “moderate.” If you become what they want, then they will become moderate toward you. Do not obey them at all, and do not attempt to become moderate.
As the level of consciousness among Turkish Muslims and communities rises, as those who understand tawhīd increase, and as more people reject Western civilization and desire Islamic civilization, the strategy of mild secularism introduced in Turkey will be abandoned, and, as in the past, rigid secularism and dictatorship will be re‑imposed. No one should think “February 28 is over, the coup plotters are on trial, there will never be another coup in Turkey.” Neither they nor Islam has changed. As long as the Islamic principle “obedience to Allah, not to servants” remains—and it is immutable—and as long as coup plotters persist in forcibly reshaping society, and as long as Westerners betray their own ideology by supporting the coup plotters, coups will not cease. Coups will not end so long as the coup plotters feel stronger than those they overthrow. Coups can be halted only if those who are subject to coups become stronger than the plotters and this fact is known to the forces inclined to coup‑making.
The prosecution of coup plotters in Turkey is both a component of the mild‑secularism strategy and a punishment and warning to those who attempted a coup without America’s permission and who defied this project. The issue is bound up with the strategies of great powers and their refusal to allow unauthorized moves; otherwise, neither the coup plotters’ power has lessened nor their mentality changed. While the mild‑secularism project renders Muslims more moderate in Turkey, in many other Middle‑Eastern countries a project of igniting civil wars and creating zones of conflict continues.
Is it believable that those who set up monarchies in the Middle East, supported these dictators for a century, and exploited the region through them, have now spent the last few years toppling the same dictators to bring freedom and democracy to the Middle East? If America opposes the dictators of Syria and Libya, why does it maintain excellent relations with other dictators in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Qatar? Since these civil wars are not intended to end dictatorship and bring democracy, for what purpose are Middle‑Eastern peoples being driven into the streets—unprepared, planless, leaderless, and cadre‑less? In the next issue we shall address what is really being aimed at ... May Allah protect you.
1. Qiyāmah, 36
2. Nisa, 105
3. Qalam, 8‑9
