Skip to main content

The Problem of Geopolitics People Find Hard to Accept

The problem that many people will have a hard time accepting the reality of is the nature of geopolitics, more specifically the common trait of international actors outside the periphery of accountability and (s)elected political figures. What does this uncanny situation imply? It implies the element of deception, specifically the fact that a person's own individual ambitions and self determination was or has been part of a by-product of strategic actors who have been trained, payed for, and benefit entirely from the art of utilizing certain segments of populations and their aims and to play them on the international stage for their own strategic interests most notably beyond the peripheral understandings of the people who have essentially been played without their knowledge.

Most people do not look favorably at such a reality despite the fact that this is exactly how our current global imperial secular order operates. 

The nature of geopolitics is basically a birds eye envisioning of the centers of power and to manipulate situations against adversarial powers many times pitting groups, nations, organizations, or individuals against the intended target without the foreknowledge of such groups of people even knowing their pawned status within the grand chessboard scheme of things. 

Based on this format, all of geopolitics has no concern whatsoever about individuals desires or aims. To bring to life a seemingly understandable example of such power maneuvering to understand more accurately this phenomenon is to explain, in brief, the nature of the Syrian conflict

One the one hand, we have a ruthless dictator that many of the Arab populace have been desiring to remove for years. From this sector, we have our mujahideen who desire to accomplish this objective. 

One slight problem that we, as Muslims firstly and as devout Mujahid supporters, have been lacking in is to exit from the local political climate and enter the geopolitical sphere. Entering the geopolitical sphere examines the benefactors and ultimate losers of a plausible outcome, essentially, the effects of a win or loose outcome. However this examination must not just analyze the combatants, but the actors that have the power to instigate, finance, or to affect the situation from abroad.

The geopolitics of Syria is one of the most strategic battles of this decade because while we as an ummah understand the necessity of removing the mushriks from power like Assad and their rule as being invalid and not recognized, our actions actually have far more devastating consequences than in the pre-modern informational warfare age. 

So, for example, we have the US, Russia and China as key periphery states that all have key objectives in the region. Part of wise counsel and review is to analyze the most detrimental towards the Muslims and what is the most beneficial towards the Muslims. 

So while on the one hand we have the Muslim populace contending with Assad's power, the unfortunate reality is that the US has the same objective albeit for clearly corrosive satanic purposes. But because these objectives are aligned, we must understand that fulfilling our ambitions in this specific aspect of the conflict inadvertently strengthens the power of the American empire in the region. 

Part of our solution, I believe, is to fulfill our objectives WHILE thwarting off the objectives of multifarious actors in the region if we desire to see fundamental change in the Muslim world in general, and Syria in specific. 

Likwise another hard pill to swallow will be to understand that whenever our actions have been carried out to fulfill our objectives, and the greatest benefactors of such actions happen to be one of our enemies, then we must come to an understanding that our immediate locally political objectives have essentially been manipulated by far reaching geopolitical objectives most notably beyond our knowledge. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Athari Way

The primary function of this brief breakdown is not to highlight the entire Athari creed, rather the purpose here is to summarize the essence of the Athari creed in the three distinct aspects that are being grossly misrepresented by the groups of Kalam theology (Ash'aris primarily along with pseudo Atharis). In short, there are three things that ahlul-hadeeth wal-athar i.e the Atharis, are having their own creed being dictated by other than themselves and being promoted in opposition to the principles of the Athari creed, hence the necessity of this brief summary of our stances. This summary is broken down into three primary issues of concern 1. Do we believe in the "literal" or the "dhaahir". Clarifying the divergence between the two 2. Ithbaat vs Tafweed al-M'anawi 3.  The standard operating procedure of classical Atharis on those issues the sources of evidences have remained silent upon So we will go forward one by one addressing these issues in the most ...

The Breakdown of Madkhali Paradigmatic Thought Processes: Secularist Mindsets

Author: Ali Boriqee Although I'm embarking on the task of deconstructing thoughts predominant of the Madkhali frame of mind, this is not aimed simply at the direct actors of the movement in specific, which include but are not specific to, organizations such as SPUBS and TROID. As members of ahlu-Sunnah wal Jama'ah, followers of the Athari creed, we must realize that the dogmatic features of Madkhali philosophy, which is more predominantly outlined by students of Rab'i al-Madkhali rather than the Shaykh himself, is a frame of mind that transcends partisan actors of the movement. The reason for this is precisely because this frame of mind has remained in the thought processes of those who even proclaim to have disassociated themselves from the partisan (hizbi) aspects to the salafi dawah and have proclaimed to have limited themselves to following " beneficial knowledge ". In other words, Madkhali dogma can and is found within members of the salafi movement who, ...

Exploring the World of "Manhaj" within Madkhali thought and Its Link to Intolerant Fiqh Standards Towards Muslims

There is a vast amount of material found within a certain segment of claimants to salafism originating from sources like SPUBS, Troid, and their partisan affiliates with regards to the topic, or rather the word " manhaj ". What is manhaj? The extremely loose meaning of the term simply means "a way". A much more common usage of the meaning in discussions is typically translated as "methodology". This is linguistically correct. However, there is a more technical meaning to it. Before I embark on providing further information on the topic, I think it is best to explain what was the exact provocation to perform this small endeavor to clarify the meaning of manhaj. There is a fundamental problem with the madkhali dissemination of the meaning of the term "manhaj" and this problem yielded possibly some unexpected errors in their blind followers. This is me giving the madkhali leadership the benefit of the doubt, something bereft from their "manhaj...