Islamic Union

[EjazR]

Many authentic hadith says the Muslim Ummah is like one body.

Also the crossroads and transit routes of world trade are located within Muslim majority areas. Considering that the canals and straights joining the Black and Mediterranean seas, the Mediterranean Sea with the Persian Gulf, and the Persian Gulf with the Indian Ocean. Additionally, the world's richest lands, in terms of such strategically important natural resources as oil and natural gas, are located in Muslim countries. The effective use of these resources represents a strategic opportunity for the Islamic world to increase its impact on world politics.

And just like a European Union, most Muslim majority countries have their land connected with each other.

Why not make a Union, I only see benefits in making a Union with Muslim majority countries.

You conveniently dodged my question. Caring for muslims is not the same as going for an "Islamic union". My friend, the main reason Muslim countries are not having an "impact" like you said is IMO because they have lost their moral compass and go against the very tenets of faith that they proclaim. Why because they conveniently use Islam in politics and just lip service and fiery sermons against Israel is enough to fool the gullible masses. That is why A

Democratic governance, value for life, freedom of speech (Even if it meant criticizing the head of state), being a welfare state were all suppose to fundamentals of Muslim majority countries, but they bypass this very fundamentals saying its not in the best interests of Islam.

One unfortunate aspect is unlike in India where the British left a democratic government from the beginning, the British and French left the government in the hands of Kings and shaikhs in the Arab countries and thus depriving a say for the common people for their own strategic interests. Of course the autocratic rulers in these countries are also to blame.

 

[SeaGull]

And Turkey would rather be a part of the European Union than have anything to do with an Islamic Union.

 

[R.A.W.]

So if the Islamic union owns the right to speak for Muslims who have not migrated to the Islamic union then it would be the direct interference in the affairs of other state because Muslims were given the right to choose. It will further push the Muslims of other nationality to have extra pressure on them to have support from external power and can result discrimination for them.

And if does not then very concept of Islamic Ummah and Islamic unification becomes flawed.

Same applies to the partition of Pakistan where Pakistan was created on the name of Islam and Indian Muslims chose to stay with India. So Pakistan's interference into Indian Muslims is considered as the direct interference into Indian affairs.

 

[R.A.W.]

And Turkey would rather be a part of the European Union than have anything to do with an Islamic Union.

When the union is created on the name of Islam how can you separate out Muslims of turkey. Are they not Muslims because of being secular?

 

[Developereo]

We touched on this idea in this thread: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...31802-pakistan-iran-turkey-confederation.html

The mechanics can be based on the EU model, with each country retaining its national character and identity.

The basic progression would be:
- Pakistan set a model of Shia/Sunni unity within its borders.
- Pakistan-Iran-Turkey form a EU-style confederation.
- Lebanon, Syria and the CARs join.
- Iraq, Jordan join.
- Remaining countries join.

Potential problems would be:
- Turkey is part of NATO, and Iran is their main foe.
- The oil shieks will not want to dilute their wealth or power.
- The CARs are mostly in the Soviet basket.
- Racism between Arabs, blacks, Asians, desis, Central Asians, etc.

I am not so worried about the geographical break between Pakistan/Bangladesh/Malaysia. The intervening countries would find it in their interest to maintain good relations, and vice versa. Think Alaska/Canada.

The incentives/benefits (aside from the obvious ones) would be:
- Persecution under the guide of GWOT will awaken Muslims.
- Immunity or resistance to Western sanctions and blackmail.
- Greater bargaining power with world powers.
- Eventual seat in the Security Council.

The unintended side-effects might be a union between EU+Israel (+Russia?)

 

[vsdoc]

Every state would function as it is.The heads of these states make decision mutually.

Like sharing of oil? How do you see that working out buddy between Saudi and bangladesh .... or you guys for that matter?

Like resolution of hostilities for that matter? How do you see that working out between Iran and Iraq during their decade long war? Or betwen you guys and Afghanistan for that matter?

Or like Muslims killing Muslims within one of the member countries? How does the Union intervene in Shia Sunni unrest in pakistan?

All countries will bear the brunt of refugees..rich muslim states will accept more.

Are you sure? Boss the Saudis (richest muslim state) dont consider sub-continental muslims to be muslims, forget citizenship in spite of years of domicile, you expect them to allow you refugee-citizen status overnight?

And while you guys are at it, how about refugee muslims moving from one poor country of the Union to a rich-er muslim Union country in search of food and shelter.

Or for that matter refugees from a muslim country in the throes of violence (war, civil unrest, ethnic cleansing, genocide, etc.) moving to a Muslim Union country blessed with peace?

Or how about free movement between populations of the Muslim union countries to greener pastures on Work Permits or Green Cards (pardon the pun)?

Noble concept ..... worth working for.

Cheers, Doc

 

[R.A.W.]

We touched on this idea in this thread: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...31802-pakistan-iran-turkey-confederation.html

The mechanics can be based on the EU model, with each country retaining its national character and identity. The toughest

The basic progression would be:
- Pakistan set a model of Shia/Sunni unity within its borders.
- Pakistan-Iran-Turkey form a EU-style confederation.
- Lebanon, Syria and the CARs join.
- Iraq, Jordan join.
- Remaining countries join.

Potential problems would be:
- Turkey is part of NATO, and Iran is their main foe.
- The oil shieks will not want to dilute their wealth or power.
- The CARs are mostly in the Soviet basket.
- Racism between Arabs, blacks, Asians, desis, Central Asians, etc.

I am not so worried about the geographical break between Pakistan/Bangladesh/Malaysia. The intervening countries would find it in their interest to maintain good relations, and vice versa. Think Alaska/Canada.

The incentives/benefits (aside from the obvious ones) would be:
- Persecution under the guide of GWOT will awaken Muslims.
- Immunity or resistance to Western sanctions and blackmail.
- Greater bargaining power with world powers.
- Eventual seat in the Security Council.

The unintended side-effects might be a union between EU+Israel (+Russia?)

I would like to see your perception of the council towards the Indian Muslims and India which hold one of the majority of Muslim population... and their approach towards Indian Muslims.

 

[SeaGull]

When the union is created on the name of Islam how can you separate out Muslims of turkey. Are they not Muslims because of being secular?

My point is Turks would prefer being Europeans than come down to an Islamic Union.

I liked your first avatar RAW - lets have it back.

 

[Developereo]

European Union is the union of countries of Europe it has nothing to do with religion neither it is based on religious grounds.

The EU was initially a temper tantrum by France and Germany because they were becoming irrelevant in global affairs. Gradually it has grown mostly as a deterrant to Russian influence.

Although the EU was not founded on the basis of Christianity, it is very much a Christian club. Everybody know the only reason for Turkey's exclusion is because it is Muslim. Opinion polls in France and Germany, its strongest opponents, always list Islam as the factor for rejecting Turkey.

If yes then union has already denied access to the Islamic Union so it has no right to interfere in the affairs of that nation.

When the US and Western countries blacklist countries on the basis of religious persecution, is that interference?
When countries are listed as state sponsors of terrorism (even internal terrorism), is that interference?
When the UN and the world holds Sudan accountable for its actions in Darfur, is that interference?
When the world Jewish organization acts as copy monitoring and hghlighting abuse of Jews across the world, is that interference?

And Turkey would rather be a part of the European Union than have anything to do with an Islamic Union.

More and more Turks are getting tired of the European charade and humialition. They know Turkey will NEVER be allowed into the EU because it is a Muslim country.

So if the Islamic union owns the right to speak for Muslims who have not migrated to the Islamic union then it would be the direct interference in the affairs of other state because Muslims were given the right to choose. It will further push the Muslims of other nationality to have extra pressure on them to have support from external power and can result discrimination for them.

The abuse of Muslims with countries outside the Union would have to be handled diplomatically, in the same way as indicated above. Muslims will have to become better at media manipulation and wielding soft power. Just like the other countries do today.

 

[Developereo]

I would like to see your perception of the council towards the Indian Muslims and India which hold one of the majority of Muslim population... and their approach towards Indian Muslims.

Indian Muslims are patriotic citizens of India and we expect all responsible countries to uphold the human rights of their citizens.

Indian Muslims would only become a concern if there were gross violations of their rights based on their religion. In such a case, India would have to explain to everyone, including non-Muslims, how it can abrogate its responsibilities.

Same thing would apply to violations of the rights of non-Muslims within the Union.

It would be an issue of human rights, not specifically Muslim rights. As a Muslim union presumably we would be more sensitive to violation of Muslims' rights, just as Western countries are extra-sensitive towards Christians, or India might be sensitive to the plight of Hindus elsewhere.

 

[Omar1984]

Another benefit of an Islamic Union:

The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organisation with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It groups 57 member states, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkans, Southeast Asia and South Asia. Only states that have muslim-majority populations may join the OIC.

Many Muslim majority countries are strategically located, are in crossroads and transite routes of world trade, and are rich in natural resources.

The economy of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) combined is GDP (at Purchasing power parity; PPP) of USD7,740 billion.

 

[R.A.W.]

Another benefit of an Islamic Union:

The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organisation with a permanent delegation to the United Nations. It groups 57 member states, from the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Caucasus, Balkans, Southeast Asia and South Asia. Only states that have muslim-majority populations may join the OIC.

Many Muslim majority countries are strategically located, are in crossroads and transite routes of world trade, and are rich in natural resources.

The economy of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) combined is GDP (at Purchasing power parity; PPP) of USD7,740 billion.

So what is the point of having Islamic Union when we already have OIC

---------- Post added at 04:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:50 PM ----------

My point is Turks would prefer being Europeans than come down to an Islamic Union.

I liked your first avatar RAW - lets have it back.

Its back

 

[gogbot]

The EU was initially a temper tantrum by France and Germany because they were becoming irrelevant in global affairs. Gradually it has grown mostly as a deterrant to Russian influence.

Although the EU was not founded on the basis of Christianity, it is very much a Christian club. Everybody know the only reason for Turkey's exclusion is because it is Muslim. Opinion polls in France and Germany, its strongest opponents, always list Islam as the factor for rejecting Turkey.



When the US and Western countries blacklist countries on the basis of religious persecution, is that interference?
When countries are listed as state sponsors of terrorism (even internal terrorism), is that interference?
When the UN and the world holds Sudan accountable for its actions in Darfur, is that interference?
When the world Jewish organization acts as copy monitoring and hghlighting abuse of Jews across the world, is that interference?



More and more Turks are getting tired of the European charade and humialition. They know Turkey will NEVER be allowed into the EU because it is a Muslim country.



The abuse of Muslims with countries outside the Union would have to be handled diplomatically, in the same way as indicated above. Muslims will have to become better at media manipulation and wielding soft power. Just like the other countries do today.

All this talk about Union based on one thing Religion. An idea that has existed since the earliest Civilizations. Is there a reason that it has to be revived today.
Have the Muslims in the world been unquestionably wronged.
Has there been a sort of ethnic cleansing of Muslims.

Franlky you are asking for a massive change in the world. with no discernible reason for the Union.


On that note what are the driving factors for this union ?

Now i have mentioned this on many threads, that i am an atheist so i see no relevance for religion and politics to get involved with one another.

atheism or a general lack of faith in God is on the rise all over the world.
Can this Islamic union based on religion stand the test of time.
how long can religion survive will go as far as the 22nd century,
23trd century, the 24th.

The first man to land on the moon, was not remembered for the fact of being the white man, a christian an amerian.
Headlines did not say that it was the first american on the moon etc

They said first human on the moon.
for the first time in all of human history. took place a singular event where we acknowledged the achievement of our own species and not that of a faction or religion.

History Remembers Neil Armstrong as the first Human,
not the first Christian and not the first American
To set foot on the moon.

In my opinion,
This Islamic union or any other religious union where faith and politics become one in the same. Is a regression of human civilization.

 

[Canaan]

good topic.
A lot of issues need to be resolved, the major being what law to abide by, devine or human?

Who to include?

The scope of the union?

The purpose of the union, is it a de facto Islamic super state, or an interest organization like another OIC?

Who leads the union? the largest muslim country? the richest muslim country? or a democratically elected leader nation, maybe through a rotation system like the EU.

How about voting (if a democracy)

what about the existing states' status, should they stay independent, like a federation? or do we demolish those and go for one large body? what about borders?

Who pays?

etc etc

I think all of this can be resolved, but the biggest hindrance would be the dictators of the middle east, they simply need to be removed coz they are in the first place as anti islamic as they can be.

I honestly hope that I will be alive to see such unity in the future. Nothing would make me more happy.

For me the most important thing is it being a strong and progressive union that will finally hinders the imperialistic interference from the West, with no extremism and equal opportunities for its citizens, muslims AND non-muslims.

 

[Developereo]

All this talk about Union based on one thing Religion. An idea that has existed since the earliest Civilizations. Is there a reason that it has to be revived today.
Have the Muslims in the world been unquestionably wronged.

The GWOT is a thinly veiled assault on Muslims -- all Muslims. It has legitimized persecution of Muslims worldwide, from 12 year old French schoolgirls, to the Muslim youth who faces job discrimination in Europe, to the bearded old man or hijab wearing woman who gets harrassed when they go to the supermarket.

You may not sympathize, or believe it, but it doesn't change the reality of what has been happening to Muslims in the last 8 years.

The fact of Islamic terrorism, both against Muslims and non-Muslims, does not justify the things I mentioned. Muslim countries are blackmailed and put under sanctions time and again to suit the political agenda of powerful countries. Countries which base their foreign policies on their religion (Israel, USA, Britain) against Muslims.

The purpose of an Islamic union would be to form an entity that is large enough to resist Western blackmail and sanctions, and which has enough clout to hold the West accountable for its mistreatment of its Muslim citizens.