Jumping Headlong into the Centuries-old Sunni-Shi’a Bloodletting.

by Eze Eluchie,

Of what concern is the issue of who are the genuine successors to Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him) to the potato farmer in the rural areas of Custer, Idaho? How does the veneration of some clerics as saints by some Muslims impact on a Stock Broker in Wall Street? Of what relevance is the observance of Ashura, if any, to an auto-worker in Michigan?  Considering the openly partial slant being portrayed by the current United States administration of Donald Trump, as exhibited in Mr. Trump’s first official state visit in favour of one of the two main sects of Islam, the questions raised above will soon become of high interest to Americans whose activities have a bearing on international affairs.

The root of the schisms between the two largest sects of the Islamic faith, the Sunni’s and Shiites (Shi’a) sects, dates back to the political succession to the mantle of leadership of the Islamic faith after the demise of the founder of the faith, Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). This religious conflict has grown over the years and has been capitalized upon by extremist elements on both sects to found the present day gory spectre of extremist Islamist fundamentalists and terror which the world is now beset with. Presently, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) ruled by the Al-Saud dynasty with its extreme adherence to Wahhabi-Sunni school of thought serves as arrow-head for the propagation of Sunni Islam philosophies whilst the Republic of Iran with its veneration of its Supreme Rulers (the Ayatolah) serves as bastion of the Shiite school of Islam. Without much gainsaying, Saudi Arabia and Iran are forever, in keeping with the centuries old rift between these principal sects of Islam, forever at daggers-drawn.  

Over the centuries, the two sects have been involved in extremely bloody battles of supremacy to outwit one another with the hatred between the two sects deepening with passage of time, spreading beyond the Middle East to places as far flung away as Nigeria and Malaysia. Some of the bloodiest wars between the two sects in recent history have included the Iraq (Sunni) – Iran (Shiite) wars, and the ongoing civil wars in Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

Historically lured on by the fragrance of cheap crude oil, US leaders have, despite its extreme non-adherence to and absolute disregard of international human right norms, tended to align with oil-rich Saudi Arabia, and by extension, Sunni Islam, in US activities in the Middle East to the detriment of members of the Shiite sect. This has directly led to continuing US suspicion of and tension with Iran. The suspicion and tension between the US and Iran is further exacerbated by the recent history of US support for draconian rule by Iran’s last Shah (Muhammad Pahlavi) and the subsequent Iranian seizure of US diplomats in Iran (from November 1979 -  January1981). Iran's insistence on developing what the Islamic Republic's leaders terms 'nuclear powers for peaceful uses' further serves as reason to breed discord with the US and Sunni Muslim states.

  

The recent sale by the US to KSA of military hardware in excess of US$100 Billion (in an environment where KSA’a main adversary is Iran); choice of KSA as the very first destination in President Trump’s very symbolic first foreign travel, and direct US military attacks at Iran-supported militia engaged in the conflicts in Iraq, Yemen and Syria under the pretext of a war against terror (despite the fact that the main Islamist terror organizations that have attacked US interests are Sunni, such as: al Qaeda, ISIS and Al Nusra) , unequivocally signals to Iran, and by extension, Shiites all over the world that under President Trump, an undeniable and explicit preference has been made in the centuries old conflict between the two major sects of Islam.

Labouring under the illusion that some targeted missile strikes and sale of sophisticated weapons will tilt centuries-old war dating back to 15^th century one way or the other is at best myopic and at worst may lead to unsavoury consequences in locations far removed from the Middle East. The Iran-bashing past time which President Trump raised to US policy during his address to a cross-section of Muslim leaders assembled for him by KSA during the course of his first foreign visit merely deepens mistrust and suspicion. This is perhaps why, soon enough, many Americans may have to understudy and learn about the differences between the Sunni and Shiite sects and why the partial inclinations being exhibited by the Trump administration between the two sects is very much ill-advised.

Picture: President Trump joins in the Sword-dance with his Saudi hosts during his recent visit to Saudi Arabia.

Perpetuating the Chibok ‘Abductions’ Fraud – When Extremist Islamist Terrorists ‘Release’ Captives Ex-Gratis.

by Eze Eluchie,

As the charade of the Chibok ‘abductions’ continue to unfold, it is increasingly becoming clear that in matters dealing with Hostage Negotiations and Relating with extremist Islamist terror organizations the Western powers, Russia and the entire international community have to enrol for proper training and briefing from the Nigerian Government. It is also emerging that extremist Islamist terrorists organization need to visit their Nigerian counterparts for schooling on how to cater for hostages for over 3 years in such a manner that the hostages come out looking far better than the leadership of the terrorist organizations. How else can one summarize the miraculous successes recorded by the Buhari Government in routinely securing the release of the Chibok ‘abductees’ whilst at the same time the terrorist group which supposedly ‘abducted’ these girls are engaged in continuing warfare against the Nigerian state.

The announcement by the Nigeria’s Federal government that 82 of the girls ‘abducted’ from the Girls secondary School in Chibok were released by Boko Haram terrorists though most welcome, is received like previous such releases, with some element of astonishment and incredulity. Already, the girls who were ‘released’ on Saturday (6^th May 2017) are scheduled to be received by Nigeria’s ailing President, Mr. Buhari, in Nigeria’s capital city today, Sunday, 7^th May 2017. As with previous such ‘releases’, there will be no debriefing of the ‘released’ girls and they will thereafter be released to their families and ‘all will live happily ever after’. Indeed!!

From the pictures available of the now ‘released girls’, most of the residents in the various Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) Camps where the international community and donor governments have poured in millions of dollars (which mostly has been looted by domestic officials leading to a declaration of a state of famine and starvation in the IDP Camps) would wish they had been the one’s ‘kidnapped’ by Boko Haram – at least they would have fared far better in the area of welfare and upkeep. Even the forever looking harassed and unkempt Boko Haram leader, Abubakar Shekau, would pray he had some of the robust appearance of the girls his terrorist group was ‘releasing’.

Without doubt, Western countries and other government who routinely have their nationals kidnapped by ISIS, Al Qeida and other extremist Islamist groups would be keenly interested in the secret ‘negotiating skills’ regularly deployed by Nigerian authorities to attain the several releases thus far secured. What do you offer murderous terrorists who routinely use children as suicide bombers, wage war on the State and its security agencies, who have professed a fatalistic desire to enthrone Shari’s laws and doctrines on a multi-ethnic secular state, and whose leadership continue to express a desire to replace the existing state authority in Nigeria with a State rooted and focused on the teachings of the Quran?

When one realizes that the ordinarily loquacious Boko Haram leader, Abubakar Shekau, who relishes in posing for the camera with his hostages, has never been pictured or videoed with the Chibok ‘abductees’ (right from the very first images released of the ‘abducted’ girls which went globally viral – in the process ensnaring global figures including the then British Prime Minister {David Cameron}, CNN Anchor {Christine Amanpour} and then US First Lady {Michelle Obama} to popularize the #BringBackOurGirls hashtag), and same Shekau continually assures all, including in a video released early this month, that he has no interest in negotiating with Nigerian authorities, one begins to wonder who actually the Nigerian Government is negotiating with to effect the release of these girls.

 

Unless perhaps the ‘terrorists’ who ‘abducted’ the Chibok girls were not the deadly extremist Islamist terrorists the world had been made to believe struck in Chibok on the night of April 2014, mysteriously carting away over 300 school girls.

Whatever be the case, with whosoever the negotiations are being conducted and for whatsoever conditions are being extracted to effect the releases of these hapless ‘abducted’ young maidens of Chibok Girls Secondary School, let the ‘releases’ continue! At an appropriate time under more conducive circumstances, proper inquiries will be made into the Chibok ‘abductions’ with a view to bringing to justice the various elements who have applied terror as an instrument of politics.

And by the way, what better time to announce the ‘releases’ and show that someone is in charge, than when the ailing President's authority and ability to govern is repeatedly being put to question by prolonged absence from public view and a noticeably depreciating ghoulish and frail ambience.

Picture: Some of the 21 earlier released Chibok ‘abductees’ dance with family members a day after ‘release’ by Boko Haram.     

Hitting Syria Over Khan Sheikhoun – A Most Unwise Move

by Eze Eluchie,

With critical campaign promises in the area of Health Care Reforms and banning Muslims from coming to the United States being declared dead-on-arrival, key appointees and allies having to be demoted or step down from sensitive positions, increasing civilian fatalities from operations in Mosul, and growing apprehension regarding the continuing investigations into Russian interference in the US 2016 Presidential elections, the Donald Trump led government in the US would give a leg-and-an-arm for whatsoever that will divert attention from its domestic woes.

Desperate for a distraction, a chemical weapon attack on Khan Sheikhoun, Syria, the perpetrators of which had not yet been ascertained by any one, looked and proved too good to forgo as a ruse to distract Americans from a Trump presidency that was becoming a fiasco. Clearly without thinking the implications through, the US administration jumped at the opportunity provided by the images of several victims of the chemical weapon attack in Khan Sheikhoun splashed across television screens globally, and ordered the bombardment of a Syrian Airbase as ‘punishment’ for the chemical weapon attack earlier in the week - ostensibly as a ploy to divert public attention from falling ratings of the President in the US.

When one realizes that independent investigations by United Nations experts had been inconclusive as to who between the Government and rebel forces had deployed and unleashed previous chemical weapon attacks in the Syrian war, and that some of the rebel forces had been established to have the capacity to produce and stock chemical weapons (ISIS had routinely released chemical weapons against Iraqi forces in the ongoing efforts to liberate Mosul and other terror-held territories), it becomes plausible that by its over-hasty reaction, the US has rendered its enormous might as a tool that can easily be instigated by rebel forces and terror elements by the mere release of a chemical weapon attack. To rebel forces and terror elements who have routinely used civilians as human shields and to whom suicide bombing is an acceptable war strategy, there would be no qualms whatsoever in unleashing a chemical weapon attack in rebel held areas, kill a couple of civilians and gain additional US airstrikes and increased involvement in the Syrian war against the Syrian government.

The immediate message the US bombardment sends to the ‘moderate extremists’ and terror elements engaged in battle against the Assad government in Syria is that; if you want to get United States involved in the war against Syria, unleash chemical weapon attacks anywhere in Syria. As a direct consequence of the US reaction, it is now expected that more horrific chemical weapon attacks will be conducted by the rebels/moderate extremists/terror elements against whom the Syrian government has been engaged in combat over the past more than 6 years.  Chemical weapons will be deployed with greater frequency in the hope of attracting more US airstrikes against the Syrian government.

And what happens if a US airstrike in Syria hits one of the several Russian Air and military installations in Syria?

Considering the policy reversal (within a spate of less than one week from when President Trump had announced that regime change would not be the foundation of US interests in Syria) which the bombardment of the Syrian Airbase symbolizes, and the likelihood of similar rash reactions to other flashpoints across the world where the countries concerned have the potential to strike back, particularly the North Korea situation, possible skirmishes in the South China Seas, and possible confrontation with Iran over diverse issues, one can conclude that  with a President Donald Trump in power, the world has never been closer, since the end of WWII to a conflict where the possibilities of deploying weapons of mass destruction (including nuclear and chemical weapons).

Technically speaking, the attacks against Syria are in addition to being in violation of International laws, also a violation of domestic United States statutes. There has been no pretence of or allegations that the Syrian government had in any way attacked or posed a threat to US interests, thus the mere unsubstantiated allegations that the Syrian government was responsible for the chemical weapon attacks in Khan Sheikhoun can not serve as justification for the US to unleash an unprovoked war of aggression against a sovereign state. At the domestic level, the 'War Powers Resolution' expressly any US President to secure congressional approval prior to launching any military attack on any country that has not attacked the US. No such congressional approval was sought or given in this instance, making the attacks on Syria earlier today unlawful under US laws. .

More and better thinking caps are needed in the White House with regards to dealing with foreign policy issues before the world is thrown into needless apocalyptic conflagrations.

Picture: One of the 59 Tomahawk missiles launched against the Syrian airbase