Madkhalists argue that it is better to work within the existing system and use peaceful means to influence change, rather than resorting to violence.

Madkhali Salafism, a quietist form of Salafi thought, has gained attention for its unique emphasis on loyalty to nations and secular authoritarian governments within the Arab world. This variant, influenced by the teachings of Sheikh Rabee al-Madkhali, distinguishes itself from other Salafi branches and has drawn praise from certain US policy-makers and analysts for its potential in countering violent jihadism.

Loyalty to Nations and Secular Authoritarian Governments

Madkhali Salafism indeed promotes a monarchist approach and advocates unwavering loyalty to secular authoritarian governments in the Arab world. Sheikh Rabee al-Madkhali, a prominent Salafi scholar, has played a significant role in shaping this variant of Salafism, which is known for its quietist stance.

Madkhali Salafists emphasize the importance of avoiding armed rebellion and instead encourage their followers to prioritize patience and endurance when facing political challenges. They believe in the preservation of social order and stability, even if it means supporting authoritarian regimes. This approach contrasts with other Salafi branches that may endorse more active and confrontational forms of resistance.

By advocating loyalty to existing political authorities, Madkhali Salafists aim to maintain social cohesion and avoid the chaos often associated with armed uprisings. Madkhalists argue that it is better to work within the existing system and use peaceful means to influence change, rather than resorting to violence.

Recognition by US Policy-Makers and Analysts

The recognition of Madkhali Salafism by US policy-makers and senior advisors to the U.S. State Department underscores the perceived value of this approach in countering violent jihadism. Figures like Will McCants and Jarret Brachman have advised the US government to engage with the Madkhali group, recognizing its potential as an ally in addressing radical ideologies.

This recognition is significant as it indicates a departure from the traditional approach of viewing Salafism solely through a confrontational lens.

By engaging with the Madkhali group, these policy-makers and advisors believe that it is possible to tap into the potential of this variant of Salafism to counter radical ideologies more effectively. This approach suggests a willingness to explore pragmatic alliances and work with religious groups that promote a non-confrontational approach to governance and social stability.

Presence in Europe

Madkhali movement has gained significant influence within European Muslim communities in recent years. While its influence in the Arab world remains present, it has become more prominent in Europe. Analysts estimate that Madkhalists and their allies make up just over half of the Salafist movement in the Netherlands, highlighting their presence and influence in Europe.

The reasons behind the growth of Madkhali Salafism in Europe are multifaceted. Factors such as migration, the establishment of religious institutions, and the search for a distinct religious identity have contributed to the spread of this variant of Salafism among European Muslims. Additionally, the quietist nature of Madkhali Salafism may resonate with individuals seeking a more conservative and non-confrontational approach to their faith and engagement with society.

The presence of Madkhalists in European Muslim communities has implications for religious dynamics, social integration, and counter-terrorism efforts. European governments and policymakers have been increasingly focused on understanding and monitoring the various Salafi strands, including Madkhali Salafism, to navigate the complexities of religious pluralism, prevent radicalization, and promote social cohesion.

Divergence from Mainstream Salafism

Madkhali Salafists indeed diverged from mainstream Salafism during the Arab Spring, particularly in their response to the Libyan Civil War and the Syrian Civil War. While many Salafists initially opposed these conflicts, the majority eventually supported the opposition due to the perceived extreme violence and oppression of the Gaddafi and Assad regimes.

In contrast, Madkhali Salafists took a different approach. They criticized the mainstream Salafists for their support of the opposition.

This divergence from the mainstream Salafist position during the Arab Spring further highlighted the distinct characteristics of Madkhali Salafism. It showcased their emphasis on non-confrontation and their belief in the preservation of social stability, even in the face of oppressive regimes.

It is important to note that the Madkhali Salafist stance does not imply support for the actions or policies of the Gaddafi or Assad regimes.

Orthodox Lifestyle and Minority Rights

Madkhali Salafists generally prioritize the promotion of a more orthodox Islamic lifestyle among Muslims rather than seeking to convert Western societies to Islam. They tend to focus on religious education, personal piety, and adherence to traditional Islamic practices within their own community.

Madkhali Salafists often accept and defend their rights as a minority community within Western contexts. They recognize the legal frameworks and democratic principles of Western societies and do not typically advocate for reshaping those societies according to their religious beliefs. 

By prioritizing the internal religious affairs of their community, Madkhali Salafists aim to strengthen the faith and commitment of their followers, rather than engaging in broader societal transformation.

Critics and Labels

Critics, including Islamists and radical Jihadists, have used the term “Murjiyah” as a derogatory label against Madkhalists. The term “Murjiyah” historically refers to a theological sect within Islam, but in this context, it is used as a pejorative term to criticize Madkhalists for what their critics perceive as “blind obedience” to governments and national laws, rather than actively participating in armed rebellions or seeking to challenge oppressive regimes.

These critics argue that Madkhali Salafists prioritize stability and social order over actively opposing perceived injustices or oppressive regimes. Islamists accuse Madkhalists of being passive, submissive, or even collaborating with authoritarian governments. 

Recognition from Policy Makers

Madkhali Salafism continues to evolve and attract attention due to its distinct characteristics. By promoting loyalty to nations and advocating patience over armed rebellion, Madkhalists have carved out a unique position within the broader Salafi spectrum.

Their emphasis on pragmatism and support for secular authoritarian governments sets them apart from other Salafi branches, garnering recognition from policy-makers and analysts. It is important to understand the nuances and influence of Madkhali Salafism within the broader context of Salafi thought and its potential implications for political and social dynamics in the Arab world.

Frustration packed with emotions, and enthusiasm packed with ignorance have always led to destruction.

Anti-Jewish hatred began after 1947, especially after the Israel and Palestine conflict. Most people have no idea about what’s what and who’s who in this conflict. A party is portrayed hero and a party is portrayed villain, while innocent people are offered to the altar of political gods.

However, after Abraham accords, those who observe the current affairs came to a realization that anti-semitism has only been used as a bait to catch the fish, and nothing else.

Islamist terror groups from Al-Qaeda to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), from Lebanese Hezbollah to Houthi militia in Yemen, from Muslim Brotherhood to ISIS, every other organization has used the anti-semitic slogans to garner the support of Muslims for their political agendas, while all hell broke loose upon the Arab and Muslim countries, and comparatively Israel has been least affected politically and economically.

Salafi Jihadism often comes into picture while talking about modern wave of terrorism. To the contrary, contemporary Salafi Imams and preachers have never approved the extremist practices, and have openly refuted them through their talks and writings. Some of them are, Shaykh Saleh Al-Fawzan, Shaykh Rabi Al-Madkhali, late. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen, and late. Shaykh Albani, etc.

According to a transcript translated in English by Abbas Abu Yahya from United Kingdom, the late Salafi Imam Albani was asked, “If one of us grabbed a Jew, is it permissible to kill him?”

The Imam who passed away in 1999 was asked, “Today in Palestine our people are in a situation of a continuous struggle with the Jews. Is it permissible according to the Sharia’ if one of us grabbed a Jew, is it permissible to kill him?”

The Imam was surprised and responded, “Is it permissible to do what!?!”. Questioner said, “Permissible to kill him?”

The Imam asked, “Okay, is it permissible to kill a Jew? Kill him!? Where? Here or over there?”

The questioner said, “Over there”.

Imam said, “Over there, my brother do you not see that when a Jew is killed then in return a great number of Muslims are killed, have you not seen this!!? Those killed from the Muslims are so many more!!?”

Questioner expressed that the killing is for “putting fear into their hearts”. Upon which Imam responded, “No!! It is not essential that it is like this.”

The questioner was curious to now “until when do we do this?”

Imam responded, “It is not essential that it is done like this!”

He further said, “Imagine, if your situation continues like this, what will be the result? What will the Muslims be watching and witnessing!!? And the Palestinians, what will they be slaughtered for? What will be the result? A Jew is killed and in return tens of Palestinians are killed, thousands imprisoned, what will be the result? Will this be a victory against the Jews?”

“This is not the way, in reality the Muslims have now mistaken the way of Jihad. Jihad begins with Jihad an-Nafs (Jihad of one’s own self) like the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) said: ‘The Mujahid is the one who makes Jihad against his desires for the sake of Allaah’. I am not talking about the hadeeth which is famous on the tongues of the people, ‘We have returned from the minor Jihad to the major Jihad’, because this is a weak hadeeth”.

The above conversation is a sound proof that the approach taken by contemporary Jihadi groups and organizations holds deviated and misguided teachings which are alien to Islam.

Frustration packed with emotions, and enthusiasm packed with ignorance have always led to destruction. It is need of the hour to rectify the past mistakes, and look forward for a progressive future where Islam is no more exploited for political goals.

Zahack Tanvir is a Saudi-based Non-Resident Indian. He is a Computer Engineer, and also holds Dip. in Journalism from London. He often writes and tweets against political Islam. He can be followed under @ZahackTanvir.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

The announcement of this abrupt disengagement sounded like a bomb.

Under the leadership of the new head of the World Islamic League, Mohammed Bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, a close to the crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, Saudi Arabia announced in January that it would separate from the mosques it control in the West.

But five months later, Riyadh did not find takers. And this Saudi disengagement raises fears of a takeover of these mosques by even more radical actors. The mosques in question are coveted by some disreputable states, such as Erdogan’s Turkey, and by non-state groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood or the Salafist movements.

Last January 19, the Saudi Arabian Mohammed Bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, passing by on the shores of Lake Geneva, declared in Le Matin dimanche, a Sunday newspaper published in Lausanne, that the Muslim World League (MWL), the religious arm of the kingdom, was disengaging from the Geneva’s Grand Mosque. And that the same arrangements will be made in the West. Saudi Arabia will no longer finance and manage places of worship.

“Everywhere, there will be a local board of directors, set up in coordination with the national authorities. Notably for security reasons,” says the former Saudi Minister of Justice, who is close to Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. The choice of Geneva is not innocent.

In 1961 he opened the Islamic Centre of Geneva (CIG), in the Eaux-Vives district. The following year, Said Ramadan, spokesman of the Brotherhood in Europe, participated in the creation of the Muslim World League (Rabitat al-Alam el-Islami) in Mecca in 1962. But in the 1970s, for obscure reasons, the rupture was effective between the Muslim World League and Said Ramadan. Not only did the Saudis cut him completely off, but they also created a competing place of worship, at Petit-Saconnex, in the neighborhood of the international organizations and the European headquarters of the UN.

A large white marble mosque, inaugurated with pomp and circumstance in 1978 by King Khaled Bin Abdelaziz, in the presence of the President of the Confederation. A prestigious building, endowed with significant financial resources, which has never ceased to marginalize the Islamic Centre of Geneva, now run by Hani Ramadan, one of Said Ramadan’s sons. Mohammed Bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa, elected in 2016 as Secretary General of the MWL, has also headed the Islamic Cultural Foundation of Geneva, which manages the Grand Mosque.

A year later, during his meeting with Pope Francis, the former Saudi Minister of Justice announced that “the true message of Islam in the world is a message of peace, love and respect, and notably the respect, by Muslims, of the laws and institutions of the countries and territories where they live”. In Geneva, he immediately cleaned up the mess, dismissing the director of the Grand Mosque, two imams and the head of security, who were on the “S” list in France.

“It is time to entrust the Geneva Mosque to a representative Swiss board of directors, with an elected president,” says the secretary general of the Muslim World League. He mentions a consultation of local Muslims “with the help of the Swiss authorities”, adding that for security reasons “we must ensure that the mosques are placed in safe hands, obviously. Then we will not intervene anymore”.

The announcement of this abrupt disengagement sounded like a bomb. But the enthusiasm soon faded away. Especially with the coronavirus outbreak and the lockdown. How could the Muslims take charge of the often prestigious places of worship from one day to the next? Geneva’s Grand Mosque employs 17 people. It is not only a place of prayer. It has a library, a school, a sports hall, a morgue.

And how can we prevent other countries or radical movements from trying to take control of all these mosques? Hasni Abidi, Director of the Centre for Studies and Research on the Arab and Mediterranean World, was quick to react, confident in the Swiss press: “Several states have views on the mosque and are following its development, such as Morocco, Turkey and Bosnia. If the withdrawal of the MWL was like offering a gift to another state, it would be a poisoned gift”.

Funding problems are not unique to Geneva, they occur in the same way in other mosques in Europe, in Brussels, Copenhagen, Madrid, Mantes-la-Jolie, Sarajevo. As for France, a secular country, it simply does not have the power to intervene in the constitution of a board of directors that could take over from the Muslim World League in the mosques that the League had controlled until then.

Since the announcement made on January, Mohammed Bin Abdulkarim Al-Issa himself admitted that he has not found any takers. But he would not go back on his decision: Saudi Arabia still intends to disengage. The question is how.

Piece first appeared on Global Watch Analysis.

Ian Hamel is the correspondent for French magazine LePoint, in Switzerland. After studying journalism in Strasbourg, he worked for several media in South America and then in Africa.

Modern Salafists strive to achieve Ikhwan’s political agenda.

The Salafists are blamed for most of the horrendous acts these days. Even before the first bullet was fired by the Syrian opposition, President Bashar Assad attributed the murders and destruction committed by his own army to the Salafists saying they are supported by Saudi Arabia and the West.

In Egypt, the young revolutionaries accused that the Salafists were supporting Mubarak and the West but it was found later that the Salafists were at the forefront of the revolution and even involved in attacks launched against the embassy of the United States.

In Tunis, leader of the ruling Islamic awakening party is now criticizing the Salafists whom he used to praise earlier. The party is now making use of the forces of ousted leader Ben Ali to hound the Salafists for the attack on US Embassy and schools.

In Libya, the Salafists have been driven out of Benghazi and their political headquarters set on fire on the charge of killing the US ambassador and attacking the consulate.

They are also blamed for other — but no less horrendous — incidents such as attacks on the Egyptian security forces in Sinai, violation of the Israeli border and killing a soldier. Are the Salafists always the bad guys and the Ikhwan Al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood) the good guys?

When we try to find who really are the Salafists we come to the conclusion that technical words and nomenclature do not represent facts. The modern Salafists are, in my view, a group of political activists still in the first phase of the growth of Ikhwan Al-Muslimeen.

On the other hand, the traditional Salafists, who do not have political views, are characterized by their strict stance on social issues such as codes of female dress, length of men’s gowns, beard and music. The traditional Salafists do not have any political views because they believe in the legitimacy of a ruler or government so long as it is not against the Shariah.

But this concept is hardly acceptable to the new Salafists, who are an extremist group at the primary phase of the Ikhwan’s growth. In Afghanistan, the Salafists and the Ikhwans have merged to form the Salafi-Jihadist group. Modern Salafists strive to achieve Ikhwan’s political agenda.

In my view there are no political “Islamist” ideologists but they mostly share views of the Ikhwan. They support the Ikhwan’s activities both politically and financially and have the same political voice and mindset.

That is why I believe that calling extremist groups as political or jihadi Salafists will be only partially correct while the fact remains that they are the Ikhwan Al-Muslimeen, although in the primary stage of development. When they have fully grown and intellectually matured they could be called the real Ikhwan.

But the matured stage of the Brotherhood is more dangerous than when it was an underground party. However, now Ikhwan is an open political party operating like any other party even though there are people who are skeptical about it.

All Islamists are Brotherhood men irrespective of whatever name we call them — Freedom and Justice Party, Salafists or Awakening party, or even Al-Qaeda. The difference is only in the degree of their Ikhwan ideology ranging between moderate Abdul Munim Abul Fatouh to the extremist Ayman Al-Zawaheri.

At the final analysis they all politically belong to each other. But the danger is when they resort to arms or profess the takfir (condemning opponents as heretics) ideology, or use their status as religious preachers. The takfir is more dangerous than armed attacks. That is why many people demand separation of the men of religions from politics excepting those who are ready to enter politics without any religious guise.

Article first published on Arab News.

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a veteran columnist. He is the former general manager of Al Arabiya news channel, and former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat. He tweets under @aalrashed.

The state project that has been promoted by the Palestinians is not an Islamic. Rather, they advocate a secular state, and they adopt communist and leftist ideologies of atheistic origins…

The negative perception of non-Muslims about the laws of Sharia is a result of the wrong understanding that some misguided Muslims espouse, especially those who tend to extremism and terrorism, due to a deep ignorance of the rules of Sharia. These misguided have caused their extremist tendencies to offend Islam and Muslims and to show Sharia law in an inhuman manner by altering and falsifying sacred texts and not realizing its linguistic indication and contexts.

Sharia has established that preserving lives and property of people as a primary principle of top priority through clear sacred texts from the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

Therefore, through the Palestinian Cause and other persistent hotbeds of tension throughout Muslim regions around the world, it seems clear that completely misinterpretation, misinformation and obvious wrong ideas are clearly and primarily in violation of this basic principle of Islamic law.

One of the great and miraculous issue about Islam is that despite the well-established belief system, divine moral values, general and specific rules, detailed controls, it does not contradict modernity, science, or coexistence with non-Muslims and good entertainment. In fact, there are many texts in the Qur’an and the Sunnah that encourage continuous logical thinking, keep learning, contemplation, improvement of living conditions, and the pursuit of peace and stability.

Salafism as a title has been misused and some ignorant Muslims have been using it as a sect. Well, it’s not a sect. It’s the original objective methodology in which the original Islam relies on. It relies on the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the pure understanding of the Prophet Mohammed peace be upon him, his companions and the earlier righteous Muslims and their following righteous Muslims. Salafism represents objectivity which is the cornerstone, which Islam was designed by Allah Almighty to fulfill, in order to transcend injustice, sectarianism, racism and extremist patterns, and to help people to avoid excessive patterns of deception, alter religious sacred texts using them in other than their specific indications and contexts.

Most what so-called (Islamic countries) are lagging behind in the fields of stability, security, infrastructure, development, economy, thought and culture. Nevertheless, “some” of governments and peoples of these countries are devoted to giving the Saudis lectures on what should or should not be done. While Saudi Arabia ranks 18th in the G20, and is ahead of many of G20 in many developmental aspects, such as competitiveness and ease of business, ranks 25th in the world in patents, and It has low crime rates. According to some study centers, Saudi Arabia is considered the fifth most powerful country in the world.

Misguided Muslims have been constantly hostile to Saudi Arabia, which is the only state in the world that embraces Sharia as the only source of legislation and embraces monotheism and prohibits manifestations of polytheism, while most of the so-called (Islamic) countries embrace secularism. Well, the case here is that the Saudi authentic objective methodology always has been exposing the various twisted patterns.

Because of ignorance and fanaticism, misguided Muslims do not care about monotheism and Sharia as a supreme objective criteria, they ignore the legitimate Islamic priorities, and they do not focus on extricating their countries and societies from polytheism, secularism, sexual immorality, alcohol and backwardness. That would keep them busy the rest of their lives if they would be seriously interested in the true Islam.

Rather, they engage in subsidiary issues or issues that are outside their legal and Islamic authority, or issues that are not considered central in the first place.

Palestine, Kashmir, Uighurs, Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Somalia

Miserable failure to adhere to Islamic objectivity (Salafism: the original Islam) is what sparked these countries and turned them into complex issues and fiery conflict areas.

Well .. their country’s system does not embrace the most important and first of Islamic principle, monotheism and Sharia, and your country ranks at the back globally in various lists and you do not show respect for (Saudi Arabia G20), the only country that embraces both monotheism and sharia systematically and popularly. So how could they claim that they truly care about Islamic causes? Rather, how could they claim that subjects they’re interested in, are pivotal Islamic causes?

Unfortunately, the misguided Muslims think in a distorted way as if they seek to condemn Islam through their practices and intellectual patterns, as they show more concern for the Palestinian cause than for the security and safety of Saudi Arabia, the cradle of Islam, the Qibla, the cradle of revelation, the resting place of the Great Prophet Mohammad (PPBUH), the only country that embraces monotheism and Sharia.

Rather, misguided Muslims keep attacking Saudi Arabia and other Muslims, they constantly antagonize and incite against it, they rejoice in every threat it faces, under false titles and fake arguments – they claim to be Islamic – while their titles and arguments actually contradict the simplest Islamic rules.

How could these misguided people claim to be Muslims? How could they boast about their fake interest in Islamic causes? While they do not celebrate the first and most important Islamic principle (monotheism and Sharia).

This is the biggest symptom of the disease, Islamic Illusion that afflicted many Muslims around the world.

No one claims that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is perfect, for this did not and will never happen except with the Messenger Mohammad (PPBUH), but it’s the best model as a state in this age in implementing the priorities of Islam, such as monotheism and Sharia, doing its best to serve Muslims, the guests of the Lord at Hajj and to serve the Qur’an and the Sunnah. It has NO relations with Israel at all.

Many Muslims look for the illusion of the caliphate by glorifying the defunct Ottoman state that had many polytheism manifestations and it persecuted Muslims and non Muslims, as it built and glorified the graves and shrines and did not care about monotheism, Sharia, the two holy mosques and knowledge – The Ottomans issued a fatwa prohibiting printing books, as it cared to extend its authority, and all its sultans did not perform the obligatory of Hajj.

Even greater, there’re the new Ottomans who glorify Turkey, a country that – constitutionally – espouses secularism, prostitution and sexual immorality, and is full of graves and shrines that have been worshiped, and has the best relations with Israel.

And misguided Muslims today are ready to support the terrorist polytheist regime (Iran) and its terrorist gangs in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, only because they hate monotheism and Sharia, and they carry out and promote hatred against Muslims, especially against Saudi Arabia, the only country that embraces monotheism and Sharia.

Are they really Muslims?

Some Muslims today are ready to blame (Saudi Arabia) for their failure to shoulder their local Islamic and national responsibilities, while their countries are mired in ignorance, polytheism, secularism, extremism, terrorism, hatred, lying, fraud, deception, aggression, backwardness and moral decay.

On a large scale in the so-called (Islamic world), by misguided Muslims, false accusations are continuously being propagated against Saudi Arabia of Zionism and being an agent and that it is a Western intelligence fabrication.

Well, think about as a real Muslims or normal human being with fine logic: is it possible that non-Muslims would establish monotheism and the Sharia? Would non-Muslims build a state that embraces monotheism and Sharia and support it?

Also, many misguided Muslims or fake Muslims like to describe the Saudis as Wahhabis, the evil stigma was invented by the Ottoman occupation hostile to the Arabs because the Arabs have been fighting back and expelled the Ottomans, and because of the monotheism is the profound ground of Saudi Arabian state since its inception in 1744, and they like to describe the Saudis with various inappropriate descriptions that express the extent of racism and distance from Islam.

Let me tell you frankly: misguided Muslims are thus the best soldiers of Satan ever, because they do not respect monotheism and Sharia, they do not respect (the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) the only state that embraces them, they do not stop attacking it, and they have not built a state that can be rival to deserve such respect even from purely materialistic aspect.

Do they accept to live this stupidity and naivety?

Islam for peoples and individuals is a comprehensive system of lifestyle that relies first on monotheism (the first absolute value), then on the pillars of Islam, then on Iman (solid faith) and behavioral controls, under a broad value system regulated by general objective rules called (the legitimate purposes).

The legitimate purposes are:

• Protecting Islam (which is based on monotheism first).
• Protecting life of people.
• Protecting mind.
• Protecting offspring.
• Protecting money and property.

Well .. how many countries that:

• Establish monotheism constitutionally and popularly and prevents polytheism?
• Puts protection of lives as a priority over material interests?
• Protects the mind from alcohol, drugs and destructive ideas?
• Protects money and property with right regulations, good infrastructure and sustainable development?
• Criminalizes adultery and sexual immorality?

These are the first priorities in Islam.

Then the following priorities, which are the distribution and hierarchy of roles and responsibilities in Islam, that can sustain the individual, the family, the society and the state to be safe. For the man is the responsibilities of his family to be well taking care of, then for the woman is the responsibilities of her inside family issues to be well taking care of, the minister in the ministry, the manager is in a sector, the businessman or woman in his/her establishment or company and so on. The king, the president or the supreme leader is responsible The firsr for the state and the people to be well taking care of.

And every people – as individuals or as a whole – are responsible for their state, independence and borders, according to the prevailing laws locally. The Pakistani is not responsible for what happens in Saudi Arabia, and the Saudi is not responsible for what happens in Egypt, the Emirati is not responsible for what happens in Lebanon, and the Moroccan is not responsible for what happens in Indonesia.

The leaders and the citizens are entitled to what happens in their country. If the leader ( a person or an institution) decided a specific policy, then you have no right to violate, so you must listen and obey, regardless of correctness of your opinion – you’re entitled to criticize in a proper ways – and this according to Islamic law is explicitly stated in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, then the scholars of the early‏ righteous Muslim ancestors (Salaf).

The head of the state (the king or the president), by Shariah is the one who‘s authorized to decide whether or not it is possible or justified to help people in another country, and he’s the one who decides how and what type of appropriate assistance, and the legislative, supervisory and executive authorities are authorized to implement this.

I present this detailed matters intentionally, so as not to confuse anyone, because many Muslims are immersed in ignorance of Islam and ignorance of Islamic principles and simplest rules, and even in managing usual personal interests, then he/she talks about the caliphate, liberating Palestine and Kashmir, fighting America, China and Zionism..etc.

Even worse, some misguided Muslims who live in London, Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Washington, Montreal, Buenos Aires, Beijing and Moscow, capitals of Christianity, secularism and atheism. Yet, they feel entitled to brag about criticising (Saudi Arabia), the cradle of Islam and the state that embraces monotheism and Sharia, and they fight it under the pretext of Islam!

The solution to the issues of any country is by following Sharia in order of priorities, through the so-called Objectives or Purposes of Shariah or legal Islamic policy, which relies on the clear sacred texts in the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

If you live in a Muslim country, then you should do your best to reform your country through good word politely and proper planning, and be a walking model in reform and awareness-raising.

And if you live in a Non-Muslim State, – if you can – then the first thing you should do is to return to your country and your Muslim community and to start from there.

And if your country, to which you belong now, or you became belong to permanently, is a non-Muslim State, then you must respect its laws, and invite people to Islam in the ways that national laws allow, and it is not permissible for you to provoke your non-Muslim people or to insult their culture, sanctities and symbols.

Palestinian Cause

Back to the Palestinian Cause, the Islamic rules are clear and transparent, so if the Palestinians couldn’t win by military means in a way that saves innocents, then Allah Almighty does not burden them beyond their power. Rather from the purposes of Sharia, in the situation of certainty or high probability of the inability to achieve victory that can save innocents, then it is Islamic obligation to hold peace in order to save lives and properties.

This can be applied to Palestine, Kashmir, the Uighurs, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan, and every place in which Muslims are exposed to the affliction of war or occupation, as the primary responsibility rests with the people of the country themselves, as far as they can, in conditions of the overwhelming expectation of victory.

Indeed, the law of Allah Almighty prohibits political conflict and political change except according to Shariah rules and regulations, so that seeking change for the better must not lead to worse consequences or disastrous as a result, such as revolutions, demonstrations, mob protesting and endless wars.

I would like to say this clearly and loudly:

The Palestinian Cause is not a primary issue in Islam, rather it belongs to what’s so-called (Legitimate Islamic Policy), to calculate and evaluate the expected gains and the consequences that could result from any decision that the state can go with.

And a mercy from Allah, one of the most important purposes of Sharia is to protect the lives of people (Muslims and non Muslims) , and Allah Almighty has established the absolute reality of His mercy when He said: (Allāh does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity), (The Holy Qur’an, 2 Al-Baqara- Ayah 286), and the Messenger of Mercy Mohammad (PPBUH) said: (If I ordered you to do something, then do of it as much as you can), Sahih al-Bukhari 7288.

If the leadership of your country believes that it is unable to help other Muslims militarily, politically or economically, then you must respect that, and continue to assist and support and improve local legal methods in a manner that does not contradict the principles of Islamic law.

As a Muslim individual in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia, Britain, France, America, China, Russia, Morocco, or South Africa, you are not responsible, according to Islamic laws, for Palestine, Kashmir, Syria, or any place other than your country.

But why?

I’ll repeat that.

A. There is a hierarchy in the distribution of roles and responsibilities in Islamic laws.

B. Every Muslim exerts his efforts to the best of his ability according to Islamic legitimate responsibilities, while not inconsistent with the supreme Sharia rules and regulations.

It’s one of your responsibilities as a Muslim to be a model of Islam walking on earth, to please Allah Almighty first, to show people the greatness of Allah’s religion, so you invite them to Islam with your high manners and knowledge, and to establish Allah’s proofs against them.

If you adopt an extremist or a terrorist ideology, or any immoral pattern – according to Islam-, politically, socially, economically or militarily, or you behave aggressively, then you necessarily become an anti-Islam, and even peaceful non-Muslims become better than you for Islam.

The moral and legal rules of Shariah are objectively determined by divine authority, not your delusions, no matter how you claim and flaunt to be a Muslim.

As for corrupt illusions, romantic dreams, wishful thinking, and false aspirations promoted by corrupt ideologies, such as Shiism in (Iran), Sufism and Naqshbandi in (Turkey), and some other regimes and groups, this matter is the most dangerous of all profoundly, as it corrupt for people their lives here and hereafter, and distort the pure image of Islam in consideration and awareness of Muslims themselves, not alone consideration and awareness of non-Muslims.

Corrupt regimes hostile to Islam, such as Iran and Turkey, and their followers and fans from the corrupt groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Takfir groups, and Shiite militias in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, you see for yourself the results of their corruption, where polytheism, massacres, extermination, destruction and crime have become a regularly wherever they are able to influence.

Al-Aqsa Mosque, despite its importance and position for Muslims, is not more important than the souls of the Palestinians and all Muslims, rather the Holy Ka’ba itself as it is despite the greatness of its place and its position in Islam, is not more important and greater than the souls of the Saudis and all Muslims.

The state project that has been promoted by the Palestinians is not an Islamic. Rather, they advocate a secular state, and they adopt communist and leftist ideologies of atheistic origins, or extremist ideologies claiming Islamic legitimacy, while it is actually otherwise.

It’s our Islamic duty as Saudis and non-Saudis to expose the emotional, moral, religious, political, economic and military blackmail to which we as Saudis and Muslims around the world have been exposed to, in the name of the Palestinian Cause or other causes. Independence is not more important than the lives of people, which are not supposed to be sacrificed, according to Islamic Shariah laws.

The Palestinian Cause has been the spearhead of all projects hostile to Islam and Muslims, especially against the Saudis, whereby Saudi Arabia (the monotheism and Sharia state)’s image has been distorted and has been fought against across the so-called (Islamic world) in the name of the Palestinian illusionary cause.

The Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group, the terrorist organization Al Qaeda, the terrorist organization ISIS, terrorist and criminal Iranian regime, the aggressive and terrorist Turkish regime, the most corrupt of all, and other corrupt regimes and groups..

All of them have been using the Palestinian Cause to kill Muslims, to harm them, and to destroy their countries, societies, security, and national capabilities. It’s enough for you that the sinister (Iranian-Turkish-Qatari evil axis with the Western atheist left) sponsored the so-called (Arab Spring) project, which turned the countries into unrivaled devastation and turned the people into gangs, thieves, or just terrified innocent people who cannot live properly or settle for anything.

All of these parties that use Islamic Causes, especially the Palestinian to blackmail Muslims, especially to blackmail Saudi Arabia, have not provided anything to the Palestinians or other Muslims for past 70 years. No independence, no state, no dignity, no rights, no development, no prosperity, not even humanitarian aid.

Whereas Saudi Arabia (the state of monotheism and Sharia) has been at the forefront of donors for decades, especially for the benefit of the Palestinians. The Palestinian Authority’s budget relies mainly on Saudi support, and in return Turkey and Iran have not provided any real aid to any people on Earth, rather both consumed their economies and capabilities in exporting polytheism, immorality, hatred, conflicts and wars.

Turkei Al-Owerde is Editor-in-Chief and Political Analyst of the Herald Report. His knowledge of the religious undertones of most Muslim Terrorist Organizations makes his many “conflict analysis” a valuable source of information for many security experts from around the world. He regularly tweets under @Turki_AlOwerde.

The Ottoman’s quickly learned how foolish they were to underestimate the power of the calling…

The Historical Roots

The grass roots movement of Imam Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab started in the eighteenth century C.E. as a movement calling to the return to the monolithic teachings of Islam in abiding to the Quran and Sunnah.

Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab calling adapted the Hanbali teachings of jurisprudence, and he denounced many fascist extremist teachings, practices and heresies among Muslims, he sought to return the belief of Muslims to its roots and remove the Clergymen control of faith and organized religious practices forced onto the people through more than 200 years of Ottoman occupation that resulted in closing schools of thought and adapt to teachings based on myths and innovated devotional practices that spread in the Arabian Peninsula.

Seeing the level of intellectual decay of the nation and the effects of the Ottoman imposed track of clergy loyal to the Ottomans that resulted in the decline of the education and culture in the Arabian Peninsula bringing it to a complete cessation collapse. Imam Mohammed called for monotheism rejecting the clergymen control of faith and collection of tribute, and devoted himself to purifying the religion and ridding it off what was imposed on the people, as he moved between the towns of Yamama until he settled in the Al-Dir’iyya.

The Imams meet and a nation is born

After the expulsion of the Imam Muhammad by Emir of the Oyiena, Ibn Muammar, for fear of the Ottoman regent the governor of Al-Ahsa, who vowed to cut trade with the Oyiena if Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was not exiled.

Imam Muhammad bin Saud (Emir of Diriyah) was a religious man who answered to the call of Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Wahhab and wanted to restore the Arabian Peninsula to its past glory and to bring back the Islamic roots back in the region.

He was the founder of the first Saudi state and the 16th Emir of Dra’iyya. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab arrived to Diriyah, and called on its people to reject all that was foreign to the religion of God and return to the monolithic teachings of Islam in Quran and Sunnah.

Al-Dir’iyya became a center for spreading the reformist call of Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab, schools were slowly popping up in villages, towns and cities across the Arabian Peninsula. The Ottoman regents, clergymen and Rouge Shiekhs started targeting the preachers and teachers.

The news of the calling spread and very few science students who later became supporters of the call and the state from Levant came to it, and the Sheikh Ibn Abdul-Wahab began sending his messages to the neighboring country regents and tribal leaders, calling for a revival of religion.

The lands were lawless and dangerous, so the Sheikh began to help Prince Muhammad bin Saud, to organize troops with very primitive weapons to enforce the basic laws in Diriyah ​​to the neighboring towns, villages and cities, and allow preachers to spread the call and establish its pillars in the region and outside it.

The Sheikh was supervising himself to prepare men, equipping armies, and sending companies, and continuing with writing lesson, teaching people writing and reading, welcoming guests, and delegations.

Battles against warlords and raiders continued and with every village, town freed from the state of lawlessness more supporters of Da`wah joined and more people were slowly started learning the basics of reading and writing.

The year is 1178 AH / 1773 C.E., Riyadh was liberated under the leadership of Prince Abdulaziz bin Muhammad bin Saud, and its former ruler, Daham bin Dawas, fled from it.

At the time of Saud bin Abdul Aziz, the state reached the apogee from a political point of view, as it reached Karbala in Iraq, and to Houran in the Levant, and the entire island was subjected to it except Yemen.

The Saudis abolished the tribute law that forced the weak to pay huge sums and the fees paid to war lords upon traveling, and Zakat was restored to the house of the Money House or Baitul-Maal. Might was no longer the rule in disputes between people as Judges were appointed.

War of the Ottoman’s and the Saudi State

The Ottoman Empire’s perception of the Saudi state varied according to the place it stretches to. The Ottoman’s viewed the Saudi state and its calling as a minor threat, a local uprising unworthy of the Empire’s direct attention.

The Ottoman’s quickly learned how foolish they were to underestimate the power of the calling. Although the Ottoman Empire felt that the calling and the Saudi state were a religious, cultural and political challenge to the Ottomans.

Khaled Homoud Alshareef holds PhD in Business and he earned Masters in Philosophy. He often writes about Islamism, Islamist factions and modern Terrorism. He tweets under @0khalodi0.

Saudi Arabia—homeland of Islam throughout its history has been participating positive policies to make peace

The Salafism Mystery

In any case, Salafism is neither an exact doctrine nor an ideology but rather means following the method of the first ancestors of Muslims, and it is an approach that has objective standards that govern both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Saudi religious scholars have issued Fatwa in 1980s to absolutely forbid suicide attacks against whoever, but imagine that the Saudis who follow Salafs are continually accused of supporting terrorism intellectually and religiously.

There are parties that claim to be Salafists, and there are parties that claim Islam. Well, not every claim is valid until it is verified. Unfortunately, most people, especially Western researchers and studies centers are making no effort to verify the claims.

Terrorist groups such as Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Taliban, Jihadists, Iranian regime and its proxies such as Hezbollah, Houthis and Shiite militias. All are anti-Islam and use name of Islam and take texts out of contexts for sake of ideological interests, control, and money.

Moderate Islam promised by Saudi Crown Prince

When Saudi Crown Prince talked about restoring Islam, he meant to restore Islam from this broad spectrum of groups that hijack Islam and use its name in most horrific ways in accord with the forces of evil and darkness such as the liberal left.

Well, how did extremist and terrorist figures like Hassan Rouhani, Jawad Zarif, Muhammad al-Houthi, ISIS and bin Laden manage to gain wide promotion in media such in Washington Post, News Week, and Qatar-based Al-Jazeera?

You should ask question of why that wide spectrum of groups: Leftists, Iran, Turkey, Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Jihadists, have common factor which is the enmity against Saudi Arabia, especially against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman.

Media campaigns against Saudi Arabia

Khashogji’s incident was in the same context, a conspiracy that many parties participated in different roles. The crime scene was equipped with spy devices, Turkish intelligence in form of journalists and an alleged fiancée, suddenly appeared in Khashoggi’s life.

Saudi history is devoid of these incidents, with exception of Khashoggi conspiracy. Many Saudi dissidents roam the world and nobody cares for them. Several countries tried to seriously shake Saudi stability and miserably failed, Khashogji was never a threat.

Well, why did this unprecedented media campaign and threats against the Saudis happened while Iranian regime, Turkish regime, Syrian regime and Qatari regime have participated to cause millions of victims, killed, injured and displaced?

There are massive and concerted efforts to eliminate Islam as a religion, and to assassinate the Saudi model that represents the center of the Islamic world.

It started a long time ago. I’ve discussed that from the beginning in this article.

To answer why? We must recognize obsession of some western parties with imposing liberal ideology (secularism) on the world by using military, political, and economical intervention under the slogans of human rights and freedom to eliminate the influence of religion from human life.

Applying some liberal manifestations has been sufficient for the West to allow some parties to practice terrorism, especially against Muslims where Muslims are majority of those victims of terrorism.

Iranian regime has been a terrorist since the beginning 1979, but the West, especially Europe, preferred its perpetuation to use it to achieve political, economic, and ideological interests. Which can be termed as “Intellectual Prostitution”.

Objectively, Saudi Arabia can not be placed with Iran and Turkey on an equal footing with regard to peace, stability, development and fight against terrorism, but the West does not have any objective standards at all regarding foreign policy.

Saudi Arabia’s fight against Terrorism

The Saudi monarchy and Saudi people were the first to be affected by terrorism. An assassination attempt against late Saudi king, a Saudi minister was kidnapped, an assassination attempt against another one and thousands of victims were citizens and residents in Saudi Arabia.

Why have Iran, Turkey and Qatar not been exposed, for 40 years, to a real terrorist threat? Only Saudi Arabia and its ally Egypt, the two moderate powers in the region, have been contentiously the most exposed to real terrorist threats.

Why has Iran that practices terrorism for 40 years been accepted and supported, even now, Europe does efforts in that way.

Why has Turkey, that has evidenced relationship with ISIS, not been subjected to such a campaign that Saudi Arabia has faced?

The current US administration and US President Donald Trump are a great exception and we, in turn, highly appreciate this clarity in fighting Iranian terrorism.

Back to Start—Saudi Arabia and Salafism

Saudi Arabia—which embraces Islam, is the most stable in Middle East, the best in achieving rates of security, development and prosperity despite violent terrorist attacks, despite being surrounded by hotbeds of violence and despite international conspiracy.

Saudi Arabia—homeland of Islam throughout its history has been participating positive policies to make peace, to consolidate security and to support development regionally and globally.

Saudi Arabia represents reference of objective moral in international relations, with former US President Jimmy Carter’s testimony that the Saudis are the only ones who say in private talk what they say in public.

Saudi objectivity helps other peoples to expose the corruption of ideologies, politicians, and media that control their societies.

The Saudi monarchy model also reveals to the world that success, peace and development are possible without democracy or liberal ideology.

Turki al-Owerde is an independent Political Analyst and Commentator from Saudi Arabia. He tweets under @Turki_AlOwerde.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.