Let’s get rid of all the ‘Isms’ at Once

I have read with great interest the piece in the NY Times contributed by Mr. Javad Zarif the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It was a candid opinion in which Mr. Zarif ranted, most rightly, about radical Islam in its Wahhabist form, which is preached principally in Saudi Arabia. One form of such thinking is Wahabbism but the other, an almost identical brand of potion, is generously offered, sponsored and served by the very same Republic that Mr. Zarif represents, and that is Khomeinism. Had Mr. Zarif been the Foreign Minister of Sweden or Switzerland or Canada, his well-crafted argument would have struck gold. Such countries support the rule of law and due process, respect human rights including women’s and minorities, have truly elected representatives, and accountable governments. The same is not true for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Other nations in the Middle East are no different, so the whole lot can stand comfortably in the guilty box. But the Minister’s argument is farcical. It is not the cat calling the kettle black, rather the cat calling its reflection in the mirror another, totally different type of cat.

It is a fact that the brand of Khomeinism which appeared with the Iranian revolution in 1979 has had a different marketing approach than Wahhabism. It offered itself as a modern, forward-looking, reformist movement in Islam whose sole mission was to unite all Muslims into one merciful and righteous nation. One nation true, but under the authority of the Scholar-Ruler or ‘Wali Al Fakih’. One person (a man invariably) with a solid theological record (in Shia teachings only), and extensive experience (being in his 80s or better in his 90s). He would be the sole representative of all Muslims on earth. The direct link between the billion-strong faithful and their creator. Quite a modernizing approach and a refreshing way to engage others in inter-communal dialogue, peace-loving discourse and multicultural exchanges. Women were cloaked in black robes, political dissenters hanged from cranes, and all forms of normal life subjected to religious scrutiny from songs to bathing suits. That on the religious front. In politics Khomeinism engaged in a destructive war against Iraq (1980-1988), and when such folly failed to produce except 1 million casualties, it started exporting religious sectarianism to destabilize the region. The US was then the guarantor of stability in the region and hence, attacking US interests became the chief mission of Khomeinism. The bombing of the US Marines barracks in Beirut in 1984, followed by the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut during same year. The kidnapping of Western hostages including the gruesome killing of the CIA station chief in Beirut. The attack on the Marines’ barracks in Khobar Saudi Arabia in 1993. More recently the maiming, killing and targeting of US Marines in Iraq using IEDs. All vivid products of such modern, righteous and ‘so-different-from-Wahhabism’ brand of Islam, as promoted by Teheran and its Mullahs. And now by its US-educated Minister of Foreign Affairs.

I never liked ‘isms’ including Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Leninism, Fascism, Racism, Sexism, Terrorism, Salafism, and surely Wahhabism. However, since we are in accord that nothing good ever came out of any ‘ism’ why not get the world rid of Khomeinism too. Neither forms of radical Islam recognize democracy as a model government, or an independent judiciary as essential to the rule of law, or freedom and liberty as unalienable rights of individuals. So dear Minister Zarif, hiding behind the beard of thy neighbor does not render yours less subject to criticism. Now this is an ‘ism’ I do like.

I have read with great interest the piece in the NY Times contributed by Mr. Javad Zarif the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It was a candid opinion in which Mr. Zarif ranted, most rightly, about radical Islam in its Wahhabist form, which is preached principally in Saudi Arabia. One form of such thinking is Wahabbism but the other, an almost identical brand of potion, is generously offered, sponsored and served by the very same Republic that Mr. Zarif represents, and that is Khomeinism. Had Mr. Zarif been the Foreign Minister of Sweden or Switzerland or Canada, his well-crafted argument would have struck gold. Such countries support the rule of law and due process, respect human rights including women’s and minorities, have truly elected representatives, and accountable governments. The same is not true for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Other nations in the Middle East are no different, so the whole lot can stand comfortably in the guilty box. But the Minister’s argument is farcical. It is not the cat calling the kettle black, rather the cat calling its reflection in the mirror another, totally different type of cat.

It is a fact that the brand of Khomeinism which appeared with the Iranian revolution in 1979 has had a different marketing approach than Wahhabism. It offered itself as a modern, forward-looking, reformist movement in Islam whose sole mission was to unite all Muslims into one merciful and righteous nation. One nation true, but under the authority of the Scholar-Ruler or ‘Wali Al Fakih’. One person (a man invariably) with a solid theological record (in Shia teachings only), and extensive experience (being in his 80s or better in his 90s). He would be the sole representative of all Muslims on earth. The direct link between the billion-strong faithful and their creator. Quite a modernizing approach and a refreshing way to engage others in inter-communal dialogue, peace-loving discourse and multicultural exchanges. Women were cloaked in black robes, political dissenters hanged from cranes, and all forms of normal life subjected to religious scrutiny from songs to bathing suits. That on the religious front. In politics Khomeinism engaged in a destructive war against Iraq (1980-1988), and when such folly failed to produce except 1 million casualties, it started exporting religious sectarianism to destabilize the region. The US was then the guarantor of stability in the region and hence, attacking US interests became the chief mission of Khomeinism. The bombing of the US Marines barracks in Beirut in 1984, followed by the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut during same year. The kidnapping of Western hostages including the gruesome killing of the CIA station chief in Beirut. The attack on the Marines’ barracks in Khobar Saudi Arabia in 1993. More recently the maiming, killing and targeting of US Marines in Iraq using IEDs. All vivid products of such modern, righteous and ‘so-different-from-Wahhabism’ brand of Islam, as promoted by Teheran and its Mullahs. And now by its US-educated Minister of Foreign Affairs.

I never liked ‘isms’ including Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Leninism, Fascism, Racism, Sexism, Terrorism, Salafism, and surely Wahhabism. However, since we are in accord that nothing good ever came out of any ‘ism’ why not get the world rid of Khomeinism too. Neither forms of radical Islam recognize democracy as a model government, or an independent judiciary as essential to the rule of law, or freedom and liberty as unalienable rights of individuals. So dear Minister Zarif, hiding behind the beard of thy neighbor does not render yours less subject to criticism. Now this is an ‘ism’ I do like.