Hiiraan Online

by Nur H. Bahal
Wednesday, September 09, 2009

Lets begin with Al-Shabab and see the factors that have and will continue to negatively affect their power base.

Al-Shabab: the Judge, the Jury and the Executioner

Al-shabab has unwavering allegiance to the Wahabi Sect. Wahabism has a number of peculiar beliefs that run directly contrary to the principles of Islam. The most critical is assigning to themselves the right to judge peoples’ beliefs and the lack thereof. Any Muslim that does not believe in the specific Wahabi point of view is branded a non-Muslim. There is an intrinsic problem with this kind of judgment, which is directly related to the concept of “Shirk” in Islam. It implies that one possesses knowledge of the inner most beliefs and private thoughts of others – in other words the “Ghaib” or the unknown. Knowledge of the unknown is in the domain of Allah. When someone who publicly and privately bears witness to the Unity of Allah and the Prophethood of Muhammed is branded a non-Muslim, it is a claim of ability to decipher the inner thoughts of a person which is itself “shirk” or associating partners with Allah – in this case associating your own perceived knowledge of the unknown with Allah’s certain knowledge of the “Ghaib”.

Another out of the usual run of things that contradicts the tenets of Islam routinely committed by Al-Shabab is legalizing the blood of human beings without just cause. The Qur’an is replete with verses that admonish Muslims and human beings not to shed the blood of another human being without just cause. Suicide bombing practiced by Al-Shabab and their political affiliate – the Taliban – purely runs contrary to all those verses. Even if we overlook the killing of a political foe in a suicide bombing, what should we make of the death of the innocent bystanders? Targeted killing of the society’s elites and influential individuals just because they do not buy into the views held by Al-Shabab is another example.

Fulfilling the limits of the Sharia, Islamic law, is another issue where Al-Shabab falls way short of the Islamic standard in two ways. First, it does not take into account the harsh circumstances of economic deprivation that drive people to break the law. In Islam, difficult situations call for lenient treatments for those who transgress upon the law – a principle whose fountain head is clearly established in the Qur’an – La yukalifu Laahu nafsan illaa wuscaha – Allah does burden a soul beyond what its capacity. Al-Shabab’s wrongful implementation of the Sharia, though, can be looked at from the point of institutional permanency. Implementation of the Sharia requires a stable, legitimate government that can continue to provide for the welfare of those whose limbs where amputated. A transitory authority without the stable financial institution required by Islam cannot provide such a continued sustenance for the victims of the Sharia.  Al-Shabab is not a permanent government. They are a militia group which will flee in an instant in the face of an invasion.  In the absence of institutional permanency, the implementation of the Sharia can be concluded to be done under the pretext of an ulterior motive.

Al-Shabab and the Concept of Difference of Opinion

Engaging debates and multitudes of opinions were birthed in the Muslim world since the Revelation came down to the Prophet of Islam (CSW). They all expounded varying degrees of ideas. These ideas differed in the interpretation of verses and philosophical views of the Creation, and the Creator. Apart from despotic Khalifs that perpetrated heinous crimes in the name of power, Muslims usually desisted from shoving their views down the throat of others until the arrival of Mohamed Abdulwahab to whom Al-Shabab claims allegiance. For all Muslim sects, shedding a fellow Muslim’s blood was sacred and remains so even today. Muslim sects see other’s point of view as an alternate way according to the Prophetic (CSWS) tradition “Ikhtilaafu Ra’yi fii ummatii raxmah” – divergence of opinion within my Ummah is a blessing. Despite the reported weakness of the hadith, it embodies a rich wisdom that carries the seeds of what can make the Ummah fully capable of structuring its own path to sustaining a vibrant Islam that can lead the world as it has done in the past. Differing opinions is a source of options; the more options you have the more solutions you get to varying situations confronting the society. Differing opinions also cultivates thought, which in turn breed development. The test of a good Muslim also lies in how much they respect the opinion of others without resorting to violence. For Al-Shabab and Hisb ul Islam, their test of adherence to the principles of Islam came when the TFG offered them unconditional dialogue to end war. They both miserably failed that test for different reasons.

A tradition of Coercion and Intimidation

The blood of every human being is sacred in Islam regardless of color, creed or ethnicity. It is illegal to kill except in self-defense proven beyond reasonable doubt that it is self-defense. Al-Shabab has proven, repeatedly, that they have no respect for the sacredness of human life irrespective of whether the Qur’an sanctioned it or not. They have killed and murdered innocent people. They have instituted suicide bombing, killing innocent bystanders who have nothing to do with politics. They claimed people’s properties as their own and have imposed upon an entire society consequences beyond their means.

Verse 256 of Chapter 2 forbids coercion of religion in Islam. “There is no coercion in religion: The right (direction) is henceforth distinct from error”. Coercion as a mono-dimensional concept that implies the act of stripping one’s ability to choose among many options applies only to the physical actions and not to conscience. It is inherent in the verse above – which is in two parts; part one prohibiting coercion and part two giving the reason for the prohibition, which is, that the right and the wrong have been clarified. The “Distinction” of right from wrong implies the body of knowledge that has been made available for human endeavor to “seek knowledge from birth to death” to find and choose the right path – a choice that will eventually become the subject of the Judgment on the Day that we all come face to face with our deeds.

To coerce someone is to refuse them not only the capacity but also the opportunity to learn, understand and choose for one’s self a number of paths. Coercion robs people in two ways: first, it deprives the coerced of the ability to exercise thinking and decision-making for him/herself thus confining him/her to a worship of rituals without any intent and sincerity. Faith arises from the conscience of the individual, which cannot be molded through punishment. It can be, however, educated and enlightened. Secondly, coercion is regurgitation of someone else’s thought and embodiment of worship. If one does not agree with them, it becomes a cumbersome burden to discard at the most opportune moment – and may be now is the time for the Somali people to cast aside coercion and its inherent repression and subjugation.

Al-Shabab has not only coerced people to their view of worship but they have systematically imposed harsh punishments at a time when people need leniency and compassion. It is human nature to do what it takes to survive in difficult times. Theft, embezzlement and even prostitution become common when people cannot earn a livelihood any other way. I am not condoning these acts but only arguing that it does not help in any way to amputate hands and legs for stealing when they come face to face with starvation or to stone to death for prostitution when she may not have an alternative means to earn a living. These harsh and inhuman punishments are imposed for an ulterior motive, and not for correcting a behavior. This becomes clear when you see Al-Shabab parading amputated limps, closing movie houses, prohibiting watching and taking part in sports, requiring women to buy specific clothing brands from specific shops, hefty taxation on commerce, forceful recruitment of young men to their militia, and as of recent, forced pulling of silver and gold teeth from men – and do the men get to keep the gold and silver teeth when they are pulled? Absolutely not!

Arabization of Somalis Piggy Bagging on Islam

“Wama arsalnaaka Illaa raxmatan lil-calamiin” – We did not send you but as a mercy to the Worlds - acknowledges the Constitutional Universality of Islam as it has the principles that allows heterogeneous societies to coexist in perfect harmony. Universality of Islam recognizes the distinctness of every society – a distinctness that upholds their identity, culture and outlook on life as long as the later two do not contradict the edicts of Islam. The traditional Arab dress is not more Islamic than the Somali dress, the Bosnian dress, the Nigerian dress, or the Indonesian dress or any other dress for that matter, as long as the requirement of modesty is satisfactorily met. Islam does not make Arab Culture a condition of becoming a Muslim. The beautiful thing about Islam is its capacity to be compatible with any culture and any society and thus, the universality of the substance of its message. The whimsy idea that one is less of a Muslim unless he or she show-cases Arab culture and ethnicity reinforces the fallacy that to be a Muslim is to be an Arab and to be an Arab is to be a Muslim which unfortunately chisels Islam of its organic, living and inbuilt universality. In addition, the idea of a culturally and ethnically undiversified Islam caters to those who hold a “Clash of Civilizations” inevitable.

The Al-Shabab leadership assumed Arab names like Abu Zubayr, Abu Mansoor etc. An important point in the Somali culture is that sons and daughters pride themselves on their father’s name. Thus, you will hear “ina hebel” (son of so) and “ina hebel” (daughter of so). Arabs pride themselves on their sons.  I do not have a problem with this culture per se but I do have a problem when Arabs impose it on my people. Are they implying Somalis should take their culture because it is superior to ours? Among other things, intolerance of the identity, culture and thought of others is common thread of fanaticism and bigotry.

Other problems have also routed Al-Shabab’s grassroots support. Despite the façade of Somalis in leadership positions in the organization, foreigners who overlook the influential role of tribalism in Somalia rule Al-Shabab. The communities in the Al-Shabab territories reneged on their support because the organization snubbed the role in management of the communities’ elders and civic society. Al-Shabab’s imposition on the community of leadership and militias from outside the locality coupled with harsh laws and uncompromising posture antagonized the community. This assumed all the traits of a colonizing force, engendered resentment and gave rise to deep calls for liberation.

As for Hisb ul Islam, they are renowned for colorful political inconsistencies with a touch of hard-line Islamism and thick streaks of tribal mindset. Its current Leader, Sheikh Dahir Aweys, who has given no reason to foreswear dialogue other than a vehement dislike for Sharif, heavily influences Hisb ul Islam. Yet, he might be one of a few members whose tenacity is uniform. Hisb ul Islam owes overwhelming allegiance to tribalism, and like tribalism, constantly reinvents itself under many names and banners. Defections of members with their militia to the TFG, Ahl Sunnah wal Jamaca, and Shabab has crippled Hisb ul Islam militarily and diminished its credibility as an organization with a plausible political position. Furthermore, it has large numbers of militia members who committed impunity in the Middle Shabelle regions during Indha Cadde’s reign in these areas. These regions have been used as a bedrock for garnering personal wealth and forced labor.

Eritrea, the primary sponsor of Hisb ul Islam, in a bid to win the proxy war with Ethiopia over Somalia, was and remains to be the main supplier of weapons and financial aid to the organization in addition to funds raised from diehard supporters inside and outside Somalia. Pressure from the International Community and threats of sanctions diminished Eritrea’s support for Hisb ul Islam which puts the burden of sustaining the war and the effectiveness of the organization solely on the shoulders of its supporters. This may compel Hisb ul Islam to shed its political skin yet again.

The imminent fall of the hard-line groups also comes as a result of the International Community’s resolve, lead by the United States of America, to shore up the TFG with increased numbers of AMISOM, a change in their mandate and provision of weapons to the TFG.

What Next?

The fall of the opposition groups ushers in a new era of opportunity not only for the TFG, but also for the war ravaged Somali people. Nevertheless, success carries responsibilities in the face of economic and political quagmire. The TFG has to show tangible prove that it is ready to lead the nation. The TFG, in its current form, a fused group with conflicting agendas and controversial characters has to grow beyond the needs of their gluttonous egos to secure any support from the Somali people. To keep garnering more grassroots support, the TFG may be required to utilize creative but transparent ways without endangering the holistic implementation of institutional building. On many occasions the President, Sheikh Sharif, has proven that he can covertly stoop well down to the dirt and use the same tactics utilized by his former allies. Many pundits have deduced that his willingness to wrangle in the mud, tribal or otherwise, like his adversaries is an unequivocal clue of his tactful disdain of the Somali interest and his love for the “throne”. Only President Sharif can qualify the truth of this statement through his actions in the near future. He has to remember that any support that he gets is not for his person but the love of bringing back the Somali nation. Given the current agreements with former warlords, greedy tribal leaders and controversial opinion makers, getting back on the path to descent governance could be a farfetched dream for the embattled Sharif.

It is also imperative for the TFG to exercises a great deal of leniency and self-control remembering that the situation can get out of hand at the slightest pretext. You cannot win the hearts of your society unless and until you can show that it is your foremost goal to relief them of the daily hardships. As such, programs like resettlement, rehabilitation of former militias, employment and education, strengthening the rule of law through curbing violations of government army and police, stamping out corruption within the government, revitalizing agricultural productivity and general reconstruction must go side by side with the attempts to build the governmental institutions. 

Somalis everywhere also share in the responsibilities that come with the end of conflict in Somalia. Somalis have to choose between the status quo of persistent chaos and becoming a nation once again. Choosing to become a nation requires more than bare wishful thinking. It goes without saying that nationhood has to begin at some point and there is no time like the present. It is also given that anyone, novice or experient, will commit their fair share of mistakes and miss their fair share of good opportunities but this should not become an a banner to criticize out of frustration. Mediocrity can be overcome but if we loose sight of the bigger goal of building a durable nation, we ought to support the present fledgling seed of government as a stepping stone to a better one, keeping in mind that people do, in fact, move on but institutions will stand until posterity. We should not let our frustrations get in the way of building lasting institutions that cure the ailments of today’s mutilated society and lay the foundations for the prosperity of tomorrow’s generations.