The Re-colonization of Muslims
By Nadir Khan, PhD
Alta Loma, CA
We, the Muslims have been bestowed with another unique distinction. We have become the first people to be re-colonized. In reality, the process has been going on for a long time, but the awareness is becoming apparent more recently.
Freedom movements have been part of the African and Asian landscape for more than a century. The South Americans were fortunate in throwing away the yoke of colonialism earlier than the Africans and Asians. And they did not have as many varieties of masters as we did. It was essentially between Portugal and Spain; and mostly Spain. Brazil was a glaring exception in the Southern Hemisphere. But the Iberians were booted out fairly early, though the lingering leftover problems are still plaguing the Continent.
Africa and Asia had so many more masters; Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Portugal. The United States was spared the colonial roll till later and in a new garb. The Philippines was briefly occupied but later let go. The Russians were an entirely different breed of cattle and Czars could not compete as vigorously with their other Caucasian brothers.
All the colonizers were white and all the colonized were colored (black, brown and yellow). The reasons for colonization were simple; access to natural resources. One may ask why it was so easy for them to occupy these countries. The reason for occupation was also simple. Almost all of them were maritime powers and they controlled the seas. In the absence of air power, the ships were the only means of transportation and the masters had a monopoly on these routes.
In some cases these colonizers came as traders (the East India Company in India); in other cases as mauraders and destroyers of native cultures and population. The Maya civilization is the example of this ruthlessness. One big irony is that in one case they came as pilgrims to avoid their own religious persecution and then liked the land so much that they decimated the natives and never left.
The end of World War II, brought the light of freedom to most of Africa and Asia. Some of the struggles of freedom were brutal like in Algeria, Kenya, Tunisia, and Vietnam. Others went a little more smoothly and some were left without infrastructure; be it in education, modes of transportation, or training of local population in running the government. Artificial boundaries were created to divide tribes and other ethnically coherent groups. This particular aspect is blatantly transparent in Africa and the Middle East and is significantly responsible for some of the present crises.
One important facet of colonialism is its consistency in achieving its goals. A good example is the now defunct Soviet Union. Though the communists were anti-royalty,
their foreign policy goals were not different than those of the Romonovs. The Soviet attempt to control and dominate their smaller neighbors, their desire to get access to the warm waters of the Indian Ocean, and their desire to be an Asian as well as European power were identical to those of the royals whom they so brutally displaced. The lesson for us to learn and remember from this is very simple: national interests do not change because of change in government or the type of the government, only the methods of achieving those goals are different.
There is an old Urdu couplet which can be paraphrased into “when the prisoners complain, their chains are changed.’’ But they still remain prisoners. That’s exactly what happened to Muslims. The colonial powers saw to it that their toadies and puppets were in power. They also arbitrarily created boundaries and thus new countries were created without any history; Jordan and Kuwait are good examples. They also left unsolved issues and problems like Kashmir. In one case they did something most audacious: they transplanted a European country in the heart of the Muslim world to control them: namely Israel. So mostly these three are a few methods which were used to re-colonize the Muslims. And to tell you the truth, they have been brilliantly successful.
If one looks at Sub-Saharan Africa and most of the Middle East and South East Asia, most of the problems can be traced or linked to remnants of colonialism. The Balfour Resolution of 1917, which resulted in the transplantation of Israel three decades later, was done by Britain during a League of Nations mandate to govern Palestine. The creation of Jordan to placate the Sharif after his loss to Ibne Saud, the kingdom in Iraq of the Sharif’s relatives and then all those Amirs, Shaikhs and Sultans are nothing more than the relics of colonialism.
There was a time when the colonial powers needed only a map and a pen. These are the two tools they used to divide and create new boundaries and new countries. Now we live in a more sophisticated and suave world, so techniques are more subtle and sophisticated too. Essentially there are some fundamental to further their goals:
They take the help of the armed forces to install their puppets and pull their strings to manipulate. Good examples of these techniques include Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan and Tunisia.
The other technique is to have hereditary rulers who are more interested in protecting their dynasty and its interests than the interests of their peoples. The examples are Saudi Arabia, Jordan, The Emirates, Kuwait, Qatr, and Oman. The colonial powers give them protection to save their thrones and in return these puppets protect the interests of the colonial powers.
And then there are other countries where another kind of royalty plays the part as in the case of Syria, Egypt and Libya. These countries have two connections, army as well as their “non-royal’’ royal families.
A new strategy, particularly in the Middle East, is to transplant a diehard ally to control their neighbors who cooperate with it just to save their skin.
The colonial powers see to it that they associate themselves with mostly secular regimes (except, of course, Saudi Arabia). They intensely dislike leaders and parties they can not control. What happened in Algeria and Tunisia, where the popular results were nullified by the armies because they did not want to give up their privileges. What the people wanted did not matter.
Right now the only thorn on the side of the colonial powers is Iran. Its internal problems notwithstanding, and there are many, its assertions are shifting the balance of power in the Middle East, and the powers to be do not like it. One can not even mention the Israeli possession of nuclear weapons without getting into trouble, while the possibilities of sanctions are being discussed about Iran. This reminds one of the ’50s, when the Shah had to flee the country with oil nationalization under Mosaddeq, the CIA intervened. But we all became witnesses to the time when no country wanted the Shah, and now he is buried in Egypt where his first queen came from.
That’s why Iran has become such an issue. But the realities on the ground are changing. It is becoming a multi-polar world. Brazil in Latin America, China and India in South East Asia are emerging world powers. Already there a group consisting of Brazil, China, India, and Russia (BCIR) flexing its muscle, reminding one of the Panchchila
( China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, and Yugoslavia) of the 50’s which almost created a Third Bloc.
A simple look at the “hot spots’’ of the world tells us that these hot spots are essentially Muslim-majority areas and no one is paying attention to remedy the situation. Look at Chechniya or the entire North Caucasus, Kashmir, and Palestine. When East Timur was annexed by Indonesia, it did not take the world power to “liberate” it because it was not a Muslim country. Several decades ago the Washington Post wrote that Kashmir was taken from Pakistan by trick. That trick is still in place. Same thing happened to the Palastine situation. These were Arab rulers who cooperated in the creation of Israel.
One wonders why more than a billion Muslims with enormous economic and natural resources and fifty-seven Muslim countries as members of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), cannot do any thing about these simmering and economically destabilizing issues. The reason is obvious: The puppets, sycophants and toadies are the tools for the re-colonization of Muslims. The prisoners do not need new chains and guards, they need their freedom and liberty and it will not come till a grassroots movement, like the one in Iran, and more recently in Kirghestan, can bring about the changes we are all yearning for.
