Middle East Sunni & Shia Muslims
How are Islamic Succession Issues Related to Sectarian Violence?
Sunni and Shi'a Muslims, sectarian violence, terrorists, and US propaganda have fueled the unrest in the Middle East. Can these separate events be reversed?
After the death of the Prophet, control of the Muslim nations inspired both division and succession issues. Those who recognize Abu Bakr and the three Caliphs before him, are referred to as Sunni Muslims. According to Islamic scholars: “One group of followers, however, refused to accept Abu Bakr. These Rafidi ("Refusers") supported the claim of Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad’s cousin (and son-in-law). The claim is based on a sermon the Prophet had given at Ghadir Khum, in which Muhammad referred to Ali as mawla, which some translate as "master." Ali’s supporter called themselves Shiat Ali (the Party of Ali).”
This fundamental differential has led to many of the disagreements over hadiths (oral traditions), and different laws were created. Shi’a recruiters in Iraq are spreading fear of a return to Sunni oppression as experienced under the Baathist Regime of Saddam Hussein. In either case it presents the problem: who will gain the power now that Saddam is dead?
Leaders of the region have added fuel to this fire and spread the concerns to their individual citizens. President Mubarak of Egypt had stated that most “Shi’a were loyal to Iran” and not their countries of residence. Jordan’s King Abdullah’s meeting in November 2006 with the radical Sunni cleric, Sheikh Hareth al-Dhari, further angered skeptical Shi’a leaders.
Yet the biggest threat to stability is heralded in the statement by Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, Prince Turki al-Faisal, “If it [America leaves,] one of the first consequences will be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shiite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis.”
Iraq, Bahrain and Lebanon are the only nations with a large Shi’a population rivaling the Sunni population in other parts of the Middle East. Highly educated, skilled and maintaining one of the highest standards of living on the planet, the two branches of Islam live peaceful, coexisting lives not only throughout the region but also in the world.
And yet the region is rife with terrorists claiming violent acts in their name. The US Department of Defense defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political,religious, or ideological objectives.”
The FBI defines it as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
When coalition forces withdrew from Iraq - Nicaragua, Spain, Dominican Republic,Honduras, Philippines, Thailand, New Zealand, Tonga, Portugal, The Netherlands, Hungary, Singapore, Norway, Ukraine, Japan, Italy, Slovakia - and Poland, Denmark, and South Korea announced plans of leaving as well, it begged these key questions:
1. Why did most of the Arab world accept the US invasion of Iraq when it happened, but now criticize it?
2. How have radical Islamists gained a following for their cause as a result of the US propaganda for the war?
3. How did this disadvantage the average, moderate Islamic individual?
Related Topic:
Christian Behavior During Ramadan
