What's new

Why Bangladesh should support Sunni Arab and oppose Iran led Shia extremism

Status
Not open for further replies.

kalu_miah

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
6,475
Reaction score
17
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
This thread is about future direction of Bangladesh foreign policy. Foreign policy is about building bridges with other countries, nations and people's - to promote and enhance national interest. I personally have no hatred for the Shia Muslims. I am not takfiri, I believe Shia's are Muslims. But since 1979, Iran's theocracy or Mullahcracy have been promoting a very virulent form of Shia extremism, to unite and help all Shia's at the expense of their Sunni neighbors, in campaign after campaign of ethnic cleansing, starting in Lebanon civil war, then taking advantage of the removal of Saddam in Iraq and now killing Sunni's in Syria, in collaboration with their Shia Alawite Assad regime and Shia Hezbollah.

The ideal outcome would be eventually for the Sunni's to wake up, beat the Shia and remove the threat of Shia supremacy so that Shia world again become a junior partner of the greater Sunni Muslim world and at least not subvert or threaten Sunni Muslim interest.

This is not a call for persecuting common Shia's of the world, and those in Bangladesh, but to urge them towards an understanding that they must leave the path of a futile conflict they will loose, give up the dream of Shia supremacy and thus return to sanity.

As one of the largest Sunni Muslim nations of the world, Bangladesh has responsibility to take direct role in this conflict. If needed and invited we should actively recruit people, perhaps as migrant workers who can then get trained in Mid-east and take part in the current conflict in Syria and future brewing conflicts in Iraq and Lebanon, so that we can help Sunni countries win and eventually integrate the whole region under greater GCC and Arab League. If we help our Sunni brothers in achieving an integrated Arab League Union and become powerful as a result, they can then help us in our hour of need, when we need their help.

A more integrated Arab world is in greater Sunni Muslim interest, it will reduce external influence, such as US, Chinese or Indian influence in these countries and make them more free to choose Sunni Muslim interest without having to worry about non-Muslim countries who they depend on, such as US, China or India.

I will cross post a series of posts I have made in other threads on this topic.
 
This is the dumbest thing I have ever read and there are some epically retarded threads in this forum. BD manpower export is primarily to the Sunni GCC countries anyway and we have traditionally sought good relationship with everyone. I see no reason to change any of that.

Your proposition that we train our people and actively participate in an intermuslim conflict is so so so stupid it beggars belief. BD primary threat comes from India and then Burma. Our primary goals should be to develop our nation economically, interconnect economically socially and strategically to the rest of the world, beef up our defenses to safeguard our sovereignty.

BD has no business getting involved in an issue that does not impact us.
 
Cross posted from another thread:

When I look at the broad sweeps of history, I see that ideology trumps all - language, ethnicity, culture, customs are all secondary. It is Islam, an ideology, that gave power in the hands of early Arabs, that spread to many lands, as a result the local population were Arabized and speak Arabic today. Shia ideology is now being used by Iran to unite Shia of the world, regardless of ethnicity or language. Regionalism coupled with ethnic and religious solidarity is used by EU to unite Europe and Euro origin countries. It is because of ideology of Islam that Pakistan separated from India, and it is because of Bengali Nationalism that Bangladesh separated from Pakistan.

Whoever comes up with a more practical ideology that will unite a large group of people or nations for their own pragmatic and survival needs, will win against competing people or nations.

This Monarchy vs Brotherhood is one such case study for me within the Sunni Arab world as a clash of competing ideologies that hampers greater integration goals. The anti-Monarchy stance of Brotherhood is foolish on the part of Brotherhood, considering the current situation. This shows how immature they are, in my opinion. Not being more inclusive with secular Muslims and Copts for creating the consitution was another example, which made both of these groups upset and gave an opening for an Army coup.

My dream is to see a world where Regionalism (GCC+, Maghreb Union, Arab League, African Union-GCC+ etc.) is taken as the first and most important primary ideology and then Sunni unity is used as the secondary ideology to ally 3 different regional unions, such as Eurasia+, ASEAN+ and AU-GCC+. A resolution to Brotherhood vs Monarchy will help with GCC+ and Arab League integration. Sunni populations in Eurasia+ (Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Central Asia), ASEAN+ (Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Bangladesh) and AU-GCC+(Arab League and Sub-Sahara Muslim countries) should help each other with their own local regional union integration process.

So in a way, I am not an Islamist, rather a "regionalist", who believe that Muslim and non-Muslim neighbor countries in a region should create regional unions for their practical needs, but Muslims (Sunni and Shia separately) should help each other to succeed in their goal of regional integration to increase their aggregate power. This way we, the smaller nations of the world, can eventually eliminate dependence on more powerful larger countries or groups of countries.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle...llions-show-support-army-6.html#ixzz2Z9NGivsv
 
Yes, Muslim world needs more sectarianism.

Why can't this kallu guy ever post anything that furthers humanity? I mean I understand he posts mental masturbation, but that's OK on a forum. But all those weird weed induced ideas can also be reconciliatory, furthering friendship and cooperation, instead they are always full of enemy making and enemy seeking, a typical intellectual midget.
 
SAFAVID DYNASTY ? Encyclopaedia Iranica

Much about the early Safavid order remains unclear. One point of uncertainty is the precise nature of their religious beliefs. Originally, they seem to have harbored Sunni convictions, but under Ḵᵛāja ʿAli they are said to have gravitated toward Shiʿism under the influence of their main supporters—Turkmen tribes who adhered to a popular brand of Shiʿism. Originating as it did in a frontier region rife with primordial beliefs mixing cabbalistic and millenarian elements, their belief system had long borne little relation to orthodox Twelver Shiʿism. Under Shaikh Jonayd, the order became more militant, turning towards an extremist form of Shiʿism (ḡoluw, see ḠOLĀT) replete with shamanistic and animistic elements that included a belief in reincarnation and the transmigration of souls, as well as the notion of a leader invested with divine attributes, the mahdi (see ISLAM IN IRAN vii. MAHDI IN TWELVER SHIʿISM). Upon Jonayd’s death, his followers allegedly began to call him “God,” and his son, Ḥaydar, “Son of God.” At the time of Shah Esmāʿil I, a genealogy was fabricated according to which Ṣafi-al-Din descended from the seventh Imam, Musā al-Kāẓem (d. ca. 800). This did little to compel him to adhere to the official doctrine and practice of the newly established faith. He wrote poetry filled with pre-Islamic Persian terms and references, referring to himself as Feridun, Khosrow, Jamshid and Alexander, as well as applying religious names, such as “son of ʿAli” and one of the Twelve Imams.

Esmāʿil I (r. 1501-24). It was under Ḥaydar’s son, Esmāʿil, that the Safavids evolved from a messianic movement to a political dynasty led by a shah rather than a shaikh. This was achieved with the assistance of the Qezelbāš, who venerated their leader as an incarnation of God and were blindly obedient to him, even offering themselves for martyrdom in his cause. They received land in return for their loyalty, and were appointed to governorships of newly conquered provinces. Safavid princes also received a Qezelbāš tutor. Having lived under the protection of the ruler of Gilān for five years, in 1499 Esmāʿil emerged from the Caspian region, defeated the Širvānšāhs, and set out to wrest control of western Persia from the Āq Qoyunlu. In 1501, the Safavid army broke the power of the Āq Qoyunlu by defeating their ruler, Alvand (r. 1497 in Diārbakr [q.v.], and then in Azerbaijan until 1502, d. 1504), in the Battle of Šarur, in the Aras valley. The borderlands of Azerbaijan, Širvān and eastern Anatolia suffered extensively in the process. Much land was laid waste, commercial traffic interrupted, and frequent outbreaks of epidemics brought much misery upon the population. The Qezelbāš also sowed terror among the largely Sunni inhabitants, forcing people to condemn the first three caliphs in public and desecrating the graves of Āq Qoyunlu rulers. With Azerbaijan seized, Esmāʿil, barely 15 years of age, inaugurated Safavid political rule in 1501 by proclaiming himself shah in Tabriz, having coins struck in his name and declaring the city his capital. He also decreed Shiʿism to be the official faith of the realm, thus endowing his new state with a strong ideological basis while giving Persia overlapping political and religious boundaries that would last to this day.

Roger M. Savory. "Safavids" in Peter Burke, Irfan Habib, Halil İnalcık: History of Humanity-Scientific and Cultural Development: From the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Century, Taylor & Francis. 1999, p. 259: "From the evidence available at the present time, it is certain that the Safavid family was of indigenous Iranian stock, and not of Turkish ancestry as it is sometimes claimed. It is probable that the family originated in Persian Kurdistan, and later moved to Azerbaijan, where they adopted the Azari form of Turkish spoken there, and eventually settled in the small town of Ardabil sometimes during the eleventh century."

Yahya Khan, the 3rd President of Pakistan (1969-1971) was a Qizilbash Shia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahya_Khan

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/middle-east-africa/263788-irans-savafid-type-minds.html#ixzz2Z9TSGmLo
 
Forgive my ignorance but what percentage of Bangladesh Muslims are Shia ?

I have never met a Shia Muslim from Bangladesh so I am not sure if this is even an issue in Bangladesh. In any event do educate me @kalu_miah....

BTW, sorry for going off topic but any news about the outcome of Ghulam Azam case ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kalu_miah,

You really should look at a map sometimes.... The levant, the Maghreb, GCC, AU and the Muslims countries of ASEAN are quite far away from us. BD stands alone and it makes no strategic interest for us to get involved in trying to mend the rift. BD foreign policy is Friendship to all, malice to none..... That should never change...
 
Persecution of Shia Muslims - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Persecution of Shia Muslims
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anti-Shi'ism is the prejudice against or hatred of Shia Muslims based on their religion and heritage. The term was first defined by Shia Rights Watch in 2011, but has been used in formal research and scholarly articles for decades.[1][2]

The dispute over the right successor to Muhammad resulted in the formation of two main sects, the Sunni, and the Shia. The Sunni, or followers of the way, followed the caliphate and maintained the premise that any devout Muslim could potentially become the successor to the Prophet if accepted by his peers. The Shia however, maintain that only the person selected by God and announced by the Prophet could become his successor, thus Imam Ali became the religious authority for the Shia people. Militarily established and holding control over the Umayyad (pronounced and spelled more like "Umayya" in Arabic) government, many Sunni rulers perceived the Shia as a threat – both to their political and religious authority.[3]
The Sunni rulers under the Umayyads sought to marginalize the Shia minority and later the Abbasids turned on their Shia allies and further imprisoned, persecuted, and killed Shias. The persecution of Shias throughout history by Sunni co-coreligionists has often been characterized by brutal and genocidal acts. Comprising only around 10-15% of the entire Muslim population, to this day, the Shia remain a marginalized community in many Sunni Arab dominant countries without the rights to practice their religion and organize.[4]

Umayyads

The grandson of Muhammad, Imam Hussein, refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the caliphate of Yazid. Soon after in 680 C.E., Yazid sent thousands of Umayyad troops to lay siege to Hussein’s caravan.During the Battle of Karbala, after holding off the Umayyad troops for six grueling days, Hussein and his seventy-two companions were massacred, beheaded, and their heads were sent back to the caliph in Damascus. While Imam Hussein’s martydom ended the prospect of a direct challenge to the Umayyad caliphate, it also made it easier for Shiism to gain ground as a form of moral resistance to the Umayyads and their demands.[5]
"Under the peaceful conditions of life at Alexandria, the Greek philosophers certainty could continue their work. The political ferment in the eastern regions, however, was something else. Muawiyah had appointed al-Mughirah ibn-Shuvah as governor of al-Basrah, and when Mughirah died,Yazid became ruler of Arabia, Iraq, and Persia, ruling through a secret service of 4,000 men. The main purpose of these 4,000 was to unmask the Shiites, and bring them to justice, which in this case meant death. So while peace seems to reign in Damascus, the western half of the empire was soon bathed in blood."[6]

Abbasids (750-1258)

The Abbasid caliphs who ruled from Baghdad imprisoned and killed Shia Imams and encouraged Sunni ulama to define Sunni orthodoxy and contain the appeal of Shiism. The last decades of the tenth century witnessed anti-Shia violence in and around Baghdad. Shias were attacked in their mosques and during the day of Ashura processions often being killed or burned alive. In 971 C.E., when Byzantine forces attacked the Abbasid empire, the first response of the caliph’s forces and angry Sunnis was to blame the Shia. Shia homes in Al-Karkh (Modern-day Iraq) were torched. This pattern of behavior became repetitive and was repeated throughout the centuries to present day. The Shia bore the forefront of popular frustrations with the failures of the Sunni rulers. They were usually treated as the enemy within and were the first to come under suspicion if there was a threat to the ruling Sunni establishment. By the middle of the eleventh-century, it became custom for Sunni mobs to loot the Shia town of al-Khakh every Saturday. These anti-Shia attitudes were further propagated by Sunni jurists of the Hanbali school of thought. Hanbalis labeled Shias as rejectors of the truth.[7]

Siege of Baghdad
After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1258, violence against Shias became more frequent, reminiscent of blaming Shias for external problems.[8]

Persecution under Seljuk/Ottoman Empire

Main article: Ottoman persecution of Alevis

In response to the growth of Shiism and the growing influence of the Safavids, the Ottoman Empire put Shias to the sword in Anatolia. Thousands of Shias were massacred in the Ottoman Empire, including the Alevis in Turkey, the Alawis in Syria and the Shi'a of Lebanon.[9]

India

Shias in India faced persecution by some Sunni rulers and Mughal Emperors which resulted in the martyrdom of Indian Shia scholars like Qazi Nurullah Shustari (also known as Shaheed-e-Thaalis, the third Martyr) and Mirza Muhammad Kamil Dehlavi (also known as Shaheed-e- Rabay, the fourth Martyr) who are two of the five martyrs of Shia Islam. Shias also faced persecution in India in Kashmir for centuries, by the Sunni invaders of the region which resulted in massacre of many Shias and as a result most of them had to flee the region.[10]

Shias in Kashmir in subsequent years had to pass through the most atrocious period of their history. Plunder, loot and massacres which came to be known as ‘Taarajs’ virtually devastated the community. History records 10 such Taarajs also known as ‘Taraj-e-Shia’ between 15th to 19th century in 1548, 1585, 1635, 1686, 1719, 1741, 1762, 1801, 1830, 1872 during which the Shia habitations were plundered, people slaughtered, libraries burnt and their sacred sites desecrated. Such was the reign of terror during this period that the community widely went into the practice of Taqya in order to preserve their lives and the honor of their womenfolk.[11]

Village after village disappeared, with community members either migrating to safety further north or dissolving in the majority faith. The persecution suffered by Shias in Kashmir during the successive foreign rules was not new for the community. Many of the standard bearers of Shia’ism, like Sa’adaat or the descendants of the Prophet Mohammad and other missionaries who played a key role in spread of the faith in Kashmir, had left their home lands forced by similar situations.

China

Most foreign slaves in Xinjiang were Shia Ismaili Mountain Tajiks of China. They were referred to by Sunni Turkic Muslims as Ghalcha, and subjected to enslavement because they were different from the Sunni Turkic inhabitants.[12] Shia Muslims were sold as slaves in Khotan. The Muslims in Xinjiang ignored Islamic rules, selling and buying Muslims as slaves.[13]

Modern Times

Egypt
Malaysia
Malaysia bans Shia's from promoting their faith.[14]

Bahrain

Further information: Human rights in Bahrain
Over two thirds of the citizen population of Bahrain are Shia Muslims. The ruling Al Khalifa family, who are Sunni Muslim, arrived in Bahrain from Qatar at the end of the eighteenth century. Shiites alleged that the Al Khalifa failed to gain legitimacy in Bahrain and established a system of "political apartheid based on racial, sectarian, and tribal discrimination."[15] Vali Nasr, a leading expert on Middle East and Islamic world said "For Shi'ites, Sunni rule has been like living under apartheid".[16]

2011 uprising

An estimated 1000 Bahrainis have been detained since the uprising and Bahraini and international human rights groups have documented hundreds of cases of torture and abuse of Shia detainees.[17] According to csmonitor.org, the government has gone beyond the crushing of political dissent to what "appears" to be an attempt to "psychologically humiliating the island’s Shiite majority into silent submission."[17]

Apartheid

Discrimination against Shia Muslims in Bahrain is severe and systematic enough for a number of sources (Time magazine,[18] Vali Nasr, Yitzhak Nakash, Counterpunch,[19] Bahrain Centre for Human Rights,[20] etc.) to have used the term “apartheid” in describing it.

Ameen Izzadeen writing in the Daily Mirror asserts that
after the dismantling of the apartheid regime in South Africa, Bahrain remained the only country where a minority dictated terms to a majority. More than 70 percent of the Bahrainis are Shiite Muslims, but they have little or no say in the government.[21]

The Christian Science Monitor describes Bahrain as practicing
a form of sectarian apartheid by not allowing Shiites to hold key government posts or serve in the police or military. In fact, the security forces are staffed by Sunnis from Syria, Pakistan, and Baluchistan who also get fast-tracked to Bahraini citizenship, much to the displeasure of the indigenous Shiite population.[22]

Indonesia

On December 29, 2011 in Nangkrenang, Sampang, Madura Island a Shia Islamic boarding school, a school adviser house and a school's principal house have been burned by local villagers and people from outside. Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world which is dominated by Sunni. A day after the persecution, a Jakarta Sunni preacher said:"It was their own fault. They have established a pesantren (Islamic school) in a Sunni area. Besides, being a Shiite is a big mistake. The true teaching is Sunni and God will only accept Sunni Muslims. If the shiites want to live in peace, they have to repent and convert."[23][24] Amnesty International had recorded many cases of intimidation and violence against religious minorities in Indonesia by Radical Islamic groups and urged the Indonesian government to provide protection for hundred of Shiites who have been forced to return to their village in East Java.[25]

Pakistan

See also: Sectarian violence in Pakistan
Pakistan has been seeing a surge in violence against Shia Muslims in the country in recent years. The violence has claimed lives of thousands of men, women and children. Shia make up at least 20% of the total population in Pakistan and come from different ethnic backgrounds. Doctors, businessmen and other professionals have been targeted in Karachi by Sunni Muslim militants on a regular basis. Hazara people in Quetta, have lost nearly 800 community members. Most of them have fallen victim to terrorist attacks by Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan which is a Sunni Muslim militant organization affiliated with Al-Qaeda and Taliban. In the northern areas of Pakistan, such as Parachinar and Gilgit-Baltistan, Muslim mitants have continuously been attacking and killing Shiites. In the most recent incident on August 16, 2012, some 25 Shia passengers were pulled out of four buses on Babusar road, when they were going home to celebrate Eid with their families. They were summarily executed by Al-Qaeda affiliated Sunni Muslim militants. On the same day, three Hazara community members were shot dead in Pakistan's southwestern town of Quetta.

Saudi Arabia

See also: 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests
In modern day Saudi Arabia, the Salafi rulers limit Shia political participation to a game of notables. These notables benefit from their ties to power and in turn, are expected to control their community.[26] Saudi Shias comprise roughly 15% of the 28 million Saudis (estimate 2012).[27][28] Although some live in Medina (known as the Nakhawila), Mecca, and even Riyadh, the majority are concentrated in the oases of al-Hasa and Qatif in the oil-rich areas of the Eastern Province. For years, they have faced religious and economic discrimination. They have usually been denounced as heretics, traitors, and non-Muslims. Shias were accused of sabotage, most notably for bombing oil pipelines in 1988. A number of Shias were even executed. In response to Iran’s militancy, the Saudi government collectively punished the Shia community in Saudi Arabia by placing restrictions on their freedoms and marginalizing them economically. Wahabi ulama were given the green light to sanction violence against the Shia. What followed were fatwas passed by the country’s leading cleric, Abdul-Aziz ibn Baz which denounced the Shias as apostates. Another by Adul-Rahman al-Jibrin, a member of the Higher Council of Ulama even sanctioned the killing of Shias. This call was reiterated in Wahabi religious literature as late as 2002.[28]
Unlike Iraq and Lebanon which have a sizable number of wealthy Shia, Saudi Arabia has nothing resembling Shia elite of any kind. There have been no Shia cabinet ministers. They are kept out of critical jobs in the armed forces and the security services. There are no Shia mayors or police chiefs, and not one of the three hundred Shia girls’ schools in the Eastern Province has a Shia principal.[28]

The government has restricted the names that Shias can use for their children in an attempt to discourage them from showing their identity. Saudi textbooks, criticized for their anti-Semitism, are equally hostile to Shiism often characterizing the faith as a form of heresy worse than Christianity and Judaism. Wahabi teachers frequently tell classrooms full of young Shia schoolchildren that they are heretics.[29]

In the town of Dammam, a quarter of whose residents are Shia Ashura is banned, and there is no distinctly Shia call to prayer. There is no Shia cemetery for the nearly quarter of the 600,000 Shias that live there. There is only one mosque for the town’s 150,000 Shias. The Saudi government has often been viewed as an active oppressor of Shias because of the funding of the Wahabi ideology which denounces the Shia faith.[30]

In March 2011, police opened fire on protesters in Qatif, and after Shia unrest in October 2011 the Saudi government promised to crushed any further trouble in the eastern province with "an iron fist."[31]

Apartheid

Saudi Arabia is often accused of practicing apartheid against its Shia citizens.[32] Mohammad Taqi writes that
The Saudi regime is also acutely aware that, in the final analysis, the Shiite grievances are not merely doctrinal issues but stem from socioeconomic deprivation, as a result of religious repression and political marginalization bordering on apartheid.[33]
 
Forgive my ignorance but what percentage of Bangladesh Muslims are Shia ?

I have never met a Shia Muslim from Bangladesh so I am not sure if this is even an issue in Bangladesh. In any event do educate me @kalu_miah....

BTW, sorry for going off topic but any news about the outcome of Ghulam Azam case ?

Percentage of Shia in BD is negligible. Shia Sunni is not an issue in BD and this thread is an epic fail vis-a-vis as it relates to BD.

Azam was found guilty by the kangaroo court. given his age and health his death sentence was commuted to 90 years imprisonment. Pure BAL drama to keep the war crime trail alive until election to ride on people's sympathy. BAL is now firmly associated with corruption and anti Islam, this is the last throw of the dice of a dying illegitimate foreign funded puppet regime.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
this is utterly disgusting, why we need to involve into this in first place ? and for the record Our holy book Qur'an does not mention anything about Sunni, keep arab conflict away as much as possible. Furthermore we have Shia here too, so it will be against our own people based on religion, Pakistan is having trouble on this issue, i do not want to see this in Bangladesh. A movie dialog should be motto of all Bangladeshi toward other Bangladeshi -'All for one, one for All'.
 
This thread is about future direction of Bangladesh foreign policy. Foreign policy is about building bridges with other countries, nations and people's - to promote and enhance national interest. I personally have no hatred for the Shia Muslims. I am not takfiri, I believe Shia's are Muslims. But since 1979, Iran's theocracy or Mullahcracy have been promoting a very virulent form of Shia extremism, to unite and help all Shia's at the expense of their Sunni neighbors, in campaign after campaign of ethnic cleansing, starting in Lebanon civil war, then taking advantage of the removal of Saddam in Iraq and now killing Sunni's in Syria, in collaboration with their Shia Alawite Assad regime and Shia Hezbollah.

The ideal outcome would be eventually for the Sunni's to wake up, beat the Shia and remove the threat of Shia supremacy so that Shia world again become a junior partner of the greater Sunni Muslim world and at least not subvert or threaten Sunni Muslim interest.

This is not a call for persecuting common Shia's of the world, and those in Bangladesh, but to urge them towards an understanding that they must leave the path of a futile conflict they will loose, give up the dream of Shia supremacy and thus return to sanity.

As one of the largest Sunni Muslim nations of the world, Bangladesh has responsibility to take direct role in this conflict. If needed and invited we should actively recruit people, perhaps as migrant workers who can then get trained in Mid-east and take part in the current conflict in Syria and future brewing conflicts in Iraq and Lebanon, so that we can help Sunni countries win and eventually integrate the whole region under greater GCC and Arab League. If we help our Sunni brothers in achieving an integrated Arab League Union and become powerful as a result, they can then help us in our hour of need, when we need their help.

A more integrated Arab world is in greater Sunni Muslim interest, it will reduce external influence, such as US, Chinese or Indian influence in these countries and make them more free to choose Sunni Muslim interest without having to worry about non-Muslim countries who they depend on, such as US, China or India.

I will cross post a series of posts I have made in other threads on this topic.
dafuq? you want another civil war in your country?
 
Pakistan’s Transition from Shia to Sunni Leadership | Far Outliers

Pakistan’s Transition from Shia to Sunni Leadership
From: The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future, by Vali Nasr (W. W. Norton, 2006), pp. 88-90:

Pakistan’s founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was an Ismaili by birth and a Twelver Shia by confession, though not a religiously observant man. He had studied at the Inns of Court in London and was better versed in English law than in Shia jurisprudence, was never seen at an Ashoura procession, and favored a wardrobe that often smacked as much of Savile Row as of South Asia. Yet insofar as he was Muslim and a spokesman for Muslim nationalism, it was as a Shia. His coreligionists played an important role in his movement, and over the years many of Pakistan’s leaders were Shias, including one the country’s first governor-generals, three of its first prime ministers, two of its military leaders (Generals Iskandar Mirza and Yahya Khan), and many other of its leading public officials, landowners, industrialists, artists, and intellectuals. Two later prime ministers, the ill-fated Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and his Radcliffe-educated, currently exiled daughter, Benazir Bhutto, were also Shia. Feeling the wind shift in the 1990s, Benazir styled herself a Sunni, but her Iranian mother, her husband from a big Shia landowning family, and her father’s name, the name of Ali’s twin-bladed sword, make her Shia roots quite visible. In a way, Benazir’s self-reinvention as a Sunni tells the tale of how secular nationalism’s once solid-seeming promise has given way like a rotten plank beneath the feet of contemporary Pakistan’s beleaguered Shia minority.

Benazir’s father came from a family of large Shia landowners who could afford to send him for schooling to the University of California at Berkeley and to Oxford. He cut a dashing figure. Ambitious, intelligent, and secular, he was a brilliant speaker, with the ability, it is said, to make a crowd of a million people dance and then cry. His oratory manipulated public emotion as the best of Shia preachers could, and his call for social justice resonated with Shia values. His party’s flag conveniently displayed the colors of Shiism: black, red, and green. Although he never openly flaunted his Shia background, he commanded the loyalty of Pakistan’s Shia multitudes, around a fifth of the population. What he lacked in the area of regular religious observance he made up for with his zeal for Sufi saints and shrines, especially that of Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, the widely popular Sufi saint of Shia extraction whose tomb is a major shrine in southern Pakistan.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s years in power (1971–77) marked the pinnacle of Shia power in Pakistan and the high point of the promise of an inclusive Muslim nationalism. But the country that Jinnah built and Bhutto ruled had over time become increasingly Sunni in its self-perception. The Sunni identity that was sweeping Pakistan was not of the irenic Sufi kind, moreover, but of a strident and intolerant brand. Bhutto’s Shia-supported mix of secularism and populism—sullied by corruption and his ruthless authoritarianism—fell to a military coup led by pious Sunni generals under the influence of hard-eyed Sunni fundamentalists. In April 1979, the state hanged Bhutto on questionable murder charges. A Sunni general, Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, strongly backed by Sunni fundamentalist parties, personally ordered that the death sentence be carried out, even after Pakistan’s highest court recommended commutation to life imprisonment.

The coup of 1977 ended the Pakistani experiment with inclusive Muslim nationalism. Shia politicians, generals, and business leaders remained on the scene, but a steadily “Islamizing” (read “Sunnifying”) Pakistan came to look more and more like the Arab world, with Sunnis on top and Shias gradually pushed out. Pakistan in many regards captures the essence of the political challenge that the Shia have faced. The promise of the modern state has eluded them as secular nationalism has been colonized from within by Sunni hegemony.

This is the dumbest thing I have ever read and there are some epically retarded threads in this forum. BD manpower export is primarily to the Sunni GCC countries anyway and we have traditionally sought good relationship with everyone. I see no reason to change any of that.

Your proposition that we train our people and actively participate in an intermuslim conflict is so so so stupid it beggars belief. BD primary threat comes from India and then Burma. Our primary goals should be to develop our nation economically, interconnect economically socially and strategically to the rest of the world, beef up our defenses to safeguard our sovereignty.

BD has no business getting involved in an issue that does not impact us.

You are welcome to express your personal opinion, as I do my own. You do not speak for Bangladesh, nor do I.
 
Forgive my ignorance but what percentage of Bangladesh Muslims are Shia ?

I have never met a Shia Muslim from Bangladesh so I am not sure if this is even an issue in Bangladesh. In any event do educate me @kalu_miah....

BTW, sorry for going off topic but any news about the outcome of Ghulam Azam case ?

I heard there are about 50,000 Shia in Bangladesh, in a country of 150 million Muslims, but I don't have exact numbers. So you are right, this is not a domestic issue for Bangladesh, like some idiots are trying to imply, claiming that there will be some Shia-Sunni civil war in Bangladesh.

What it is, is a foreign policy issue for Bangladesh. Since 1975, when Bangladesh got into OIC, Bangladesh received financial help from Arab Sunni brother countries, in the form of grants and employment based remittance of millions of migrant workers, while we have no such relationship with the only Shia majority country Iran. So it is only fitting that we return the favor of siding with them, even without considering Sunni unity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom