Saturday, March 19, 2011

The ancient loathing between Sunnis and Shi'ites is threatening to tear apart the Muslim world By JOHN R BRADLEY


The ancient loathing between Sunnis and Shi'ites is threatening to tear apart the Muslim world
By JOHN R BRADLEY

Last updated at 1:43 PM on 19th March 2011




Religious tension: About 70 per cent of Bahrain is Shi'ite, though the Sunnis rule the nation
The bitter, bloody feud between the two branches of Islam, the Sunnis and the Shi’ites, has gone on for centuries and now this vicious sectarian strife is exploding again in Bahrain, threatening to cause an even greater conflict in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
The implications of the worsening hostility for the world are nightmarish, for the entire region could soon be gripped by turmoil, bloodshed and economic meltdown. What was naively seen a few weeks ago as a fight between freedom and autocracy could descend into an epic clash between two Muslim ideologies, the savagery made all the worse by their long history of enmity.
The roots of the hostility between Sunni and Shia lie not in profound theological differences, but in the political intrigues that took place in the Muslim world in the 7th Century. When the Prophet Mohamed died in AD 632, the question of the succession to his leadership was dominated by family rivalries and disputes.
Essentially, there were four candidates to succeed as ‘caliph’, or leader, and one group in particular, which went on to form the Shi’ites, strongly favoured the claims of Ali, the grandson of Mohamed. Even the name, Shi’ite, derives from ‘party of Ali’. But three times in succession, Ali was passed over as each of the other candidates was chosen before him.
The opposition to Ali deepened the sense of anger among his supporters. Eventually, in this climate of tribal factionalism, Ali became the fourth caliph, though the indignation of his followers was provoked when he was then brutally assassinated.
The tribal feuding in the post-Mohamed era reached its climax at the Battle of Karbala in AD 680. This is really the key moment in the creation of the Shi’ite movement, the point at which the fissure was permanently established.

More...
Fresh blunder from the Farce Office as flight evacuating Britons from Bahrain leaves EMPTY after they refuse to pay £260 each for tickets
PETER MCKAY: What do we do about Gaddafi? Let Arabs take him out
At the battle, Ali’s grandson, Hussein, was killed and, in the aftermath of his death, he came to be regarded by the Shi’ites as a martyr. The split between the Shi’ites and the opposing faction which took on the name Sunni, or ‘tradition’, has existed ever since that battle, causing endless sectarian trouble across the Middle East and the Arab world.The division soon acquired the trappings of theology. In turn, this has worsened the bigotry and hatred.
For example, fundamentalist Sunnis regard the Shi’ites as heretical because they say the worship of Ali and Hussein contradicts the Muslim belief that Mohamed was the last Prophet. However, most Shi’ites would dispute this, arguing that they revere Ali and Hussein, but do not worship them like they do Mohamed.

The Sunni belief in the heresy of the Shi’ites leads to repellent prejudice in Saudi Arabia, which has an overwhelmingly Sunni population and where the Shi’ites are widely loathed. Sunnis, for example, often say that you should never accept any food from a Shi’ite because he will spit in it before he hands it over.
Although the two sects live alongside one another, it isn’t an easy coexistence. Shi’ites face outright discrimination.
Partly this hostility stems from the fact that Saudi Sunnis are mainly Wahabbis, a cult which adopts the most literal and narrow brand of Islamic theology. Indeed, according to the most extreme Wahabbi mentality, the act of killing a Shi’ite infidel will improve a Sunni zealot’s chance of entering heaven.
In reverse, the Shi’ites do not regard Sunnis as infidels or heretics and do not feel they have anything spiritually to gain by killing them.

Merciless: In Iraq, the country's Shi'ite majority were persecuted ruthlessly under the rule of Saddam Hussein and his Sunni-dominated Baath Party
This explains why nearly all suicide-bomb attacks against Muslims have been perpetrated by Sunnis (Al Qaeda is a Sunni group).
The consequences of this split have been devastating. For although only 10 to 15 per cent of the Muslim world are Shi’ites, they are concentrated in strategically vital areas.
A  round 85 per cent of the Iranian population is Shi’ite. Similarly, 70 per cent of Bahrain is Shi’ite, though the Sunnis rule the nation. In Yemen, around half the population are Shi’ite. In Saudi Arabia, where Sunnis make up 85 per cent of the population, the Shi’ites are the majority in the eastern province where most of the oilfields are.
This is a recipe for worsening conflict. We could now be witnessing a repeat of the storm that swept through the world after the Iranian revolution of 1979, when the Shi’ites overthrew the Shah of Persia, and Ayatollah Khomeini urged the overthrow of Sunni dictatorships and monarchies throughout the region.
There is a chilling echo of that today as the Iranian regime vociferously backs the Shi’ite rebels in Bahrain and encourages upheaval in the  eastern province of Saudi Arabia.
In response, the Sunni rulers of Saudi Arabia are determined to crush all sparks of Shi’ite rebellion in Bahrain, which is why they have sent in troops. We may be in the first stages of a major conflagration between the Saudi Wahabbi bigots and the Iranian Shi’ite zealots.
But within country borders, too, bloody conflict between the sects is hardly less serious.
In Iraq, the country’s Shi’ite majority were persecuted ruthlessly under the rule of Saddam Hussein and his Sunni-dominated Baath Party. Shi’ites are thought to constitute between 50 and 70 per cent of Iraq’s 31 million people. Since the fall of Saddam, Shi’ite-led fundamentalist parties have dominated the political scene and the country has been riven by violent sectarian divisions.
In Pakistan, there are similarly violent problems, even though Shi’ites make up only between five and 20 per cent of the population of 170 million. Recent decades have seen frequent attacks on the minority Shi’ites, and bloody retaliation. Up to 5,000 from both sides are thought to have been killed.
Analysts point to two main causes: the spread of hardline Sunni Islam from Saudi Arabia, and the return of Sunni jihadis — extremists who believe they are fighting a holy war — from Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban. The latter, fired up on jihadi fervour and armed to the teeth, are fighting what they perceive as Western influence.

Support: Kuwaiti Shiites protest in support of Shiite-led Bahraini anti-government protesters in Kuwait City yesterday
Even in Iran, the only Islamic country that is officially Shi’ite, there is a long-simmering, violent Sunni insurgency against the Shi’ite regime in the south-east of the country.
This antagonism between the two groups does not exist everywhere in the Muslim world. In much of North Africa, the lines between the two creeds are blurred, with none of the bigotry that scars the Middle East. In overwhelmingly Sunni Egypt, for example, the population happily coexist with their minority Shi’ites. The only tragedy is that this attitude does not prevail more widely.
Our Foreign Office is predictably making the right soothing noises about lowering the temperature of conflict. But in our imperial past, we played a regrettable role in encouraging tensions in the Middle East.

Different nations same beliefs: Supporters of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr hold Bahraini and Iraqi flags during a demonstration to support the anti-government protesters in Bahrain
Bahrain is the classic example. In the 1860s, the British brokered a deal with the Al-Khalifa royal family, who still rule Bahrain to this day, and installed them as rulers. Bahrain effectively remained a Sunni-dominated British protectorate until independence in 1971, and the army now shooting protesters on the streets of Manama is partly trained, funded and armed by Britain.
The ruling family in Saudi Arabia conquered a vast area of the Arabian Peninsula in the 1920s with the enthusiastic diplomatic and financial support of the British. Saudi Arabia’s first king, Ibn Saud, who was on the British payroll and whose top advisers were British, founded the extremist Wahabbi kingdom in 1932 with full British blessing.
Divide and rule was a pragmatic device of empire and Britain was adept at cultivating the Sunnis at the expense of Shi’ites.
Now it looks like we and the rest of the Western world could be paying a terrible price for our past policies.
John R. Bradley is the author of Saudi Arabia Exposed and Inside Egypt.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Search This Blog