Joint Declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Political Follow-up - Outlines
Joint Declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation

President of the European Council, Charles Michel, together with President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, announced on Tuesday 10 January 2023 in Brussels the future strategic cooperation between Europe and NATO to address the repercussions of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, defend the security and common values of the Euro-Atlantic area, corroborate the central role of the alliance, and stress the importance of a European security capable of contributing positively to the security of the Atlantic region and the world.

It is noticeable that the declaration of NATO, the European Council, and the European Commission has added to their previous statements in Warsaw in 2016 and Brussels in 2018 the notion of the challenges and strategic rivalry emanating from authoritarian regimes which undermine democratic interests and values, and which must be confronted together. These statements are all consistent with the goals of the US, especially with regard to building an alliance against China in the Indo-Pacific region to integrate it within the international system. This trend also comes in response to the tremendous pressures that America has placed on the member states of the alliance to increase their defence spending, which was initiated by former President Trump and corroborated by President Biden and which became a major demand after Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

It is no secret that NATO is an effective tool that the United States harnesses to maintain its hegemony over the European continent to prevent it from deciding its security, foreign policies, and international relations in isolation of its will, especially with the emergence of France's tendency to be independent of the United States in the defence aspects, which would weaken American influence on the European continent.

These new statements dealt a heavy blow to President Macron's calls for establishing a European defence framework independent of NATO, which Macron described as "brain dead". In particular, this announcement came in response to the French National Strategy Review Report last November, about which Macron stated that "France intends to maintain its unique position within the Alliance in that it has an independent defence policy and its own nuclear deterrent," adding that "France intends to enhance its influence and the influence of its European allies regarding major changes in the position of the alliance as well as future strategic stability in Europe." Hinting at France’s future direction, he said, "The alliance is not something that requires me to rely on, but rather something that I choose and work with... We must re-establish our strategic independence in Europe."

This French approach includes engineering an independent European defence in which NATO would not be a central or major factor, as Macron referred to in the context of his statement to reassure the European alliance members hesitant to support his vision of the existence of an independent French nuclear deterrent, in an attempt to restore France's role and centrality in European security affairs, especially after America had explicitly supported Germany and targeted France's influence in its former African colonies, such as Mali, Chad, Mozambique, and West and North Africa, and after America had directed France’s attention to regions where the latter has nothing but to serve American interests, such as the role that Macron played in Lebanon and the Baghdad summit.

As for the role of the Alliance in the Indo-Pacific region, the Alliance adopted at the Madrid Summit 2022 the necessity of "confronting the institutional challenges emanating from China", despite European discontent. Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy stated, "NATO was not conceived for operations in the Pacific Ocean — it’s a North Atlantic alliance.” He added, “Certainly one can consider other threats and challenges… but for the time being, don’t you think that we have enough threats and challenges on the traditional scenario of NATO?”

However, since Trump took office, it has become clear that the US has begun to compel the Europeans to implement its dictates towards NATO, and subjugate them to its policies towards Russia and China through Trump's demands to raise the defence budget for the alliance and through the Ukrainian war, after the “terrorism” justification for rehabilitating and activating NATO has become expendable. And unlike the strategy of the alliance in 2010, which made fighting what they called "terrorism" a strategic priority, the alliance's strategy at the Madrid Summit moved the threat of "terrorism" to a secondary level and focused on Russia and China. The documents of the American National Security Strategy during the Trump era stated that strategic competition with Russia and China has become the most threatening factor. This was also reflected in NATO's strategic summit last June in Madrid, whose closing statement announced that member states had pledged more defence and financial aid to Ukraine and that they had agreed on a new strategic concept for the period between 2022 and 2030, and formally invited Finland and Sweden to join it. The statement outlined its perception of global threats in vital areas, how to respond to those threats, and the general plans for the next decade. There is no doubt that the focus of NATO's new strategy on Russia also aims to control Turkey's behaviour and its relationship with Russia, and the repercussions of that relationship on the region's issues and tracks. It also aims to contain Russia and keep it as a scarecrow for European countries, as the alliance sees in its strategic concept that Russia constitutes the biggest and most crucial direct threat to the security of the alliance and peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic region and the countries of eastern and southern Europe.

NATO’s document in Madrid stated in Article 8 that Moscow's military build-up, including in the Baltic, Black Sea and the Mediterranean, along with its military integration with Belarus, challenged the security of the alliance and the interests of its countries. This required strengthening the alliance and deterrence among the allies by raising the defence budget, which would deepen Europe's dependence on the US and bring more profits to the latter.

As for China, although it is outside the scope of NATO's missions, the Madrid Document included it in clauses 13 and 14 at the same level as the Russian threat. This constitutes a prelude by the United States for its future policies towards China and the Indo-Pacific region, and an attempt to prevent the European-Chinese rapprochement in a way that reduces the challenges and undermines the justification for rehabilitating and activating NATO. The document indicated that the threats to the alliance's "interests, security, and values" stem from the "declared aspirations of the People's Republic of China," and from China's adoption of "a wide range of political, economic, and military tools to increase its global presence and flex its muscles," adding that "deepening the strategic partnership between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation and their mutual attempts to undermine the rules-based international order run counter to our values and interests." Among those endeavours through which the United States wants to expand NATO's missions and scope of work is the protection of intellectual property among the missions of the alliance, which is directly related to the accusations against China in this regard.

It is clear from all of this that the declaration of NATO, the European Council, and the European Commission on future strategic cooperation reflects the extent of American blackmail and influence in European institutions, and also reflects the success of the United States in achieving its goals related to changing the security environment of the European continent through the Ukrainian crisis, and its intention to contain major powers and direct their policies, and averting the dangers of the rivalries from Russia, China and the European Union in the current century.

27 Jumada al-Akhirah 1444h                                              hizbuttahrir.org
20 January 2023  

Sino-Afghan Agreement on Oil and Gas Extraction 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Political Follow-up - Sino-Afghan Agreement on Oil and Gas Extraction

The international media widely reported on Thursday 5January 2023 the signing of a deal between the Taliban government of Afghanistan and the Chinese company, Xinjiang Central Asia Petroleum and Gas Co (CAPEIC), for joint oil and gas exploration in the Amu Darya basin in northern Afghanistan.

The news was reported in a manner designed to raise concerns of the European countries and Afghanistan’s neighbours on the repercussions of Chinese expansion and its fallouts in Central and South Asia, especially on India which has made several attempts with the Taliban government to invest in Afghanistan.

Several media outlets opted to report the reality of the agreement in a terrifying manner, pointing to American geological reports stating that the primary resources in Afghanistan contain a huge wealth of gold, precious stones, coal, oil, gas, lithium and a number of rare earth minerals worth more than a trillion dollars, and that the Taliban were set to give China virtually total control over the mining of lithium, which is vital for the production of alternative energy storage batteries to which Europe is seeking to switch to nullify Russian blackmail and compensate for its energy needs, only to find itself in another energy security issue should China dominate the lithium metal reserves, as propagated by US reports and the media.

It is also noted that the statistics related to the Taliban’s agreement with China, such as the amount of oil expected to be extracted, about 87 million barrels in an area of 4,500 kilometres in the Amu Darya basin, as well as the 3000 jobs created by the project which will be filled by Afghan youth, serve as a domestic political discourse within the framework of the Taliban government's efforts to address the unemployment problem by providing new job opportunities for the masses.

This is supported by the statement of the Afghan government spokesperson, Zabihullah Mujahid, on his Twitter account, saying that the Afghan government has a 20% stake in the project which could rise to 75% in the future.

In light of this, and in order to uncover the reality of the Taliban’s role in regional and international relations, it is imperative to read the event within the framework of the US agreement with the Taliban signed in Qatar, to which US National Security Adviser Jack Sullivan referred, warning that any breach by the Taliban would expose it to sanctions, and had resulted in the sudden withdrawal of the US forces from Afghanistan which confused the European Union, aroused its fears and the fear of China and Russia.

It is clear from a host of indications that the Taliban have abandoned their previous approach and sought to integrate into the so-called international community, and from the statements of their officials who called for a "normal" relationship with the United States, and even welcomed the arrival of American companies to invest in their country. Moreover, America's silence over the Taliban's move to return to " the international community”, according to international standards, its silence over expanding its relations and receiving its leaders through its agents in the Emirates, and its silence over the agreements concluded by the Taliban with China and Russia, all of this indicates that America is deliberately harnessing the Taliban as a hotbed of tension in the region, especially for India as the Taliban is normalising relations with China at its expense, in the face of China’s expansion which the United States portrays as a threat and a challenge to Western interests and values to prevent European politicians and peoples from thinking about independence from America, and to justify the expansion of NATO missions beyond Europe. Also, China's expansion into areas of American influence would subject its interests to American decisions and would generate competition between China and the European Union and Russia. This American manoeuvre includes allowing China to expand in Africa, although its investments and loans, and the countries’ need for Chinese supply chains have ignited the desire of many rulers to expand their relations with China amid the volatility of American policy due to the divisions within America’s deep state, as seen from America’s standpoint on stopping the war in Ukraine with the pressure from the military-industrial complex on the Biden administration to prolong the war.

Afghanistan has been and still is a place of competition for major powers because of its geopolitical and economic position, and despite the US blockade on Afghanistan, the United States remained silent over the Taliban's building of relations with China and Russia to project them as outlaw countries that disrespected "universal" values. China is nonetheless taking advantage of the Taliban's isolation, and at the same time, it does not recognize the Taliban movement as the official government of the country, according to the official website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry which describes the Taliban as an "interim government", merely to achieve its interests, through non-governmental Chinese companies. This is because China is aware of the geopolitical importance of Afghanistan as a country that is a key to many countries including Pakistan, India, Iran and the Central Asian countries, and a link to the map of energy production and consumption. It links the Caspian Sea, Iran and India, in addition to its logistical importance to the Belt and Road initiative over which China concluded an agreement with Russia to link Central Asia with its south and west. Also, the Chinese expansion into Afghanistan is a threat to the interests of India, which has always wanted to build economic and political ties with Afghanistan, but it collided with the demands of the Pakistani mediation.

Finally, the Chinese agreement with Afghanistan comes at a time when President Xi's government is seeking to reset relations with Europe and acquire a trump card to exert pressure on Europe, and drive a wedge in the alliance that America established against his country. The Europeans fear that China does not have any ethical or value standards, and this in itself impedes President Xi's efforts to build his relations with the Europeans. In addition, China is acting on the grounds of its national security and its fears of having its security and interests targeted by Islamic movements such as the Turkistan Islamic Party, which was sheltered by the Taliban during their control of the country before the US invasion, and the expansion of ISIS operations through the Khorasan Organisation.

18 Jumada al-Oolah 1444h                                  hizbuttahrir.org
11 January 2023

Ben Gvir’s Incursion into al-Masjid al-Aqsa 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Political Follow-up - Ben Gvir’s Incursion into al-Masjid al-Aqsa

On Tuesday 3rd January, the leader of the “Religious Zionist” extremist movement and minister of "Israeli” national security, Itamar Ben -Gvir, stormed the courtyards of al-Masjid al-Aqsa under heavy protection of the occupation police. This makes the nature of the move official and expressive of the approach of the most extreme government among successive "Israeli" governments.

This step, which the United States rejects because of its contradiction with the internationalisation of the holy precincts, and because of its dimensions and repercussions on its project in the Middle East, was met with regional and international "condemnation", as Washington confirmed, through the White House National Security Council's spokesperson, that "the United States stands firmly for preservation of the status quo with respect to the holy sites in Jerusalem,” adding that “any unilateral action that jeopardizes the status quo of Jerusalem holy sites is unacceptable.” The US ambassador to "Israel", Thomas Nides, for his part stressed that the Biden administration made it clear to the "Israeli" government that it was averse to any steps resulting in undermining the status quo of the holy sites. Therefore, and in a warning to Netanyahu, who is eager to preserve his achievements with the countries of the alliance and normalisation, America instructed the UAE to demand that the Security Council meet publicly on Thursday to debate the latest developments in occupied al-Quds.

In the context of international pressure threatening Netanyahu and the extreme right with isolation, the British Consulate in al-Quds said it was important for everyone to avoid all activities that fuel tensions and undermine chances of peace. The French embassy in Tel Aviv also stressed on its Twitter official account France's "absolute adherence" to preserving the status quo of the holy sites in the city of al-Quds. Meanwhile, the European Union's Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, Sven Koopmans, said on Tuesday, that the current situation in the holy sites in the city of al-Quds and Jordan's guardianship over them constitute "a necessity for the continuation of regional peace and stability." As for what is meant by the "status quo", it is the situation that prevailed in the holy places during the Ottoman period and continued during the period of the British Mandate of Palestine and Jordanian rule until after the "Israeli" occupation of al-Quds in 1967, which stipulates that al-Masjid al-Aqsa is for Muslims with the right of non-Muslims to tourism only.

Hamas had sent a message through the Egyptian mediator and the United Nations that it would not stand "idly by" if Ben-Gvir carried out his threat to storm Al-Aqsa Mosque, while Ben-Gvir said during his storming of Al-Aqsa that his government would not surrender to the threats of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), and that the “Temple Mount” is the most important place for the people of "Israel". This statement, in addition to what he confirmed during his election campaign regarding the continuation of the incursions, reveals the goals of the incursion which are reflected in gauging the international, regional and local reactions, continuing to reshuffle the pack, thwarting the solutions of the final settlement and the "two-state solution" according to the proposed American formula, which limits "Israeli" sovereignty over the West Bank, al-Quds, and the holy sites, and affirming the "Israeli" attempt to change the status quo and push towards the (temporal and spatial) division of the holy sites, imposing a fait accompli, and changing the rules of engagement imposed by Hamas in the "Battle of the Sword of al-Quds". And in addition to Ben-Gvir’s desire to confirm his credibility in front of his constituents, to whom he promised to continue storming Al-Aqsa if he became a minister as well as to show his ability to support and enable Netanyahu to face the American pressure, and even to show his popular weight and restrict Netanyahu himself to the agenda of the most extreme right. Therefore, it is expected that Netanyahu will invoke the Iranian nuclear file as a political priority and resume the attack on military sites in Syria to enhance his domestic popularity, disrupt the negotiations on the Palestinian track, and activate it on the track of normalisation and the regional solution. It is also expected that the domestic file will remain on a hot plate, exploited by the extreme rightwing parties to invest it politically and strengthen their positions and their national religious agenda, while the United States will continue its efforts to reshape "Israeli" public opinion in favour of the "peace" agenda through various pressures that may reach implicating Netanyahu in another battle with the resistance factions and their activists, terrorising the population of "Israel", and holding them responsible for the consequences of supporting extremist religious parties.

As for the division of the holy sites that the storming of al-Masjid al-Aqsa by religious jews aims at, it means allocating specific times for Muslims to enter al-Masjid al-Aqsa , and other times for jews; that is, dividing the hours and days throughout the year between Muslims and jews, and allocating al-Masjid al-Aqsa to the jews during their 100-day holidays, in addition to all Saturdays throughout the year; and this is from a temporal perspective.

As for the spatial division, it means allocating certain areas and corners of Masjid al-Aqsa to each of the two parties. That is, converting parts of the mosque complex into synagogues in which prayers are held. This is the main purpose of the increasing incursions and the establishment of Talmudic prayers in the courtyards of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, especially with the growth of the Zionist "religious" movement for three decades, which has become a lever for extremist religious parties that influence the directions of "Israeli" governments and hinder the American agenda.

The importance of dividing the holy sites that "Israel" seeks to impose, and its danger to the fate of Palestine and its people, lies in extracting a recognition of the so-called "Israeli" right in Palestine, which is based on biblical allegations that do not stand up to the peremptory facts of the Qur'an, scientific data and the distorted biblical texts themselves, which restricted the "divine promise" to the children of "Israel" to worshiping God alone (according to their book), since despite our rejection of their allegations and their distorted book, they broke the covenant with their Lord according to the recognition of their distorted book itself.

Therefore, dividing the holy places does not only mean giving up Palestine and its sanctities, but also lending legitimacy to their false claims which call for their right to Palestine and their right to build their temple on the ruins of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, and the right of their cancerous state to exist on the land of Palestine, which is something that the Muslims, represented by every single sincere individual in the armies, leaders of the masses, and political organisations, should resolutely not allow to be endorsed by the traitorous regimes and puppet rulers.

Finally, it should be noted that the international hypocrisy, standpoints of denunciation, condemnation, weeping, and wailing practised by the Arab regimes over the storming of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque is a cheap investment in order to absorb the anger of Muslims. For definite, these actions are not in defence of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Blessed Land, nor what they call the "Palestinian right", and which is not designed to deter "Israel" from carrying out its terrorist activity against Palestine and its afflicted people, because the West's demands for "Israeli" compliance with "international legitimacy" is misleading, because that "international legitimacy" is the same one that granted "Israel" the legitimacy to occupy Palestine from the sea to the river, and because the denunciation and condemnation of the Arab rulers do not go beyond words, while in practice the alliance and normalisation with the Zionists is in full swing. The denunciation and condemnation proceed within the framework of acknowledging "Israel’s" "right" to most of the lands of Palestine, and within the framework of criminalising its resistance, preserving the alleged "Israeli" superiority over the Muslims, and showing it as an invincible state, and all this with the complicity of the puppet rulers, who suspended Jihad and even criminalised and prohibited it. Had it not been for their betrayal, the herds of cowardly extremists would not have dared to desecrate the sanctities of the Muslims and provoke their feelings.

11 Jumada al-Oola 1444h                                           hizbuttahrir.org
4 January 2023
 

Ben Gvir’s Incursion into al-Masjid al-Aqsa 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Political Follow-up - Ben Gvir’s Incursion into al-Masjid al-Aqsa

On Tuesday 3rd January, the leader of the “Religious Zionist” extremist movement and minister of "Israeli” national security, Itamar Ben -Gvir, stormed the courtyards of al-Masjid al-Aqsa under heavy protection of the occupation police. This makes the nature of the move official and expressive of the approach of the most extreme government among successive "Israeli" governments.

This step, which the United States rejects because of its contradiction with the internationalisation of the holy precincts, and because of its dimensions and repercussions on its project in the Middle East, was met with regional and international "condemnation", as Washington confirmed, through the White House National Security Council's spokesperson, that "the United States stands firmly for preservation of the status quo with respect to the holy sites in Jerusalem,” adding that “any unilateral action that jeopardizes the status quo of Jerusalem holy sites is unacceptable.” The US ambassador to "Israel", Thomas Nides, for his part stressed that the Biden administration made it clear to the "Israeli" government that it was averse to any steps resulting in undermining the status quo of the holy sites. Therefore, and in a warning to Netanyahu, who is eager to preserve his achievements with the countries of the alliance and normalisation, America instructed the UAE to demand that the Security Council meet publicly on Thursday to debate the latest developments in occupied al-Quds.

In the context of international pressure threatening Netanyahu and the extreme right with isolation, the British Consulate in al-Quds said it was important for everyone to avoid all activities that fuel tensions and undermine chances of peace. The French embassy in Tel Aviv also stressed on its Twitter official account France's "absolute adherence" to preserving the status quo of the holy sites in the city of al-Quds. Meanwhile, the European Union's Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, Sven Koopmans, said on Tuesday, that the current situation in the holy sites in the city of al-Quds and Jordan's guardianship over them constitute "a necessity for the continuation of regional peace and stability." As for what is meant by the "status quo", it is the situation that prevailed in the holy places during the Ottoman period and continued during the period of the British Mandate of Palestine and Jordanian rule until after the "Israeli" occupation of al-Quds in 1967, which stipulates that al-Masjid al-Aqsa is for Muslims with the right of non-Muslims to tourism only.

Hamas had sent a message through the Egyptian mediator and the United Nations that it would not stand "idly by" if Ben-Gvir carried out his threat to storm Al-Aqsa Mosque, while Ben-Gvir said during his storming of Al-Aqsa that his government would not surrender to the threats of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), and that the “Temple Mount” is the most important place for the people of "Israel". This statement, in addition to what he confirmed during his election campaign regarding the continuation of the incursions, reveals the goals of the incursion which are reflected in gauging the international, regional and local reactions, continuing to reshuffle the pack, thwarting the solutions of the final settlement and the "two-state solution" according to the proposed American formula, which limits "Israeli" sovereignty over the West Bank, al-Quds, and the holy sites, and affirming the "Israeli" attempt to change the status quo and push towards the (temporal and spatial) division of the holy sites, imposing a fait accompli, and changing the rules of engagement imposed by Hamas in the "Battle of the Sword of al-Quds". And in addition to Ben-Gvir’s desire to confirm his credibility in front of his constituents, to whom he promised to continue storming Al-Aqsa if he became a minister as well as to show his ability to support and enable Netanyahu to face the American pressure, and even to show his popular weight and restrict Netanyahu himself to the agenda of the most extreme right. Therefore, it is expected that Netanyahu will invoke the Iranian nuclear file as a political priority and resume the attack on military sites in Syria to enhance his domestic popularity, disrupt the negotiations on the Palestinian track, and activate it on the track of normalisation and the regional solution. It is also expected that the domestic file will remain on a hot plate, exploited by the extreme rightwing parties to invest it politically and strengthen their positions and their national religious agenda, while the United States will continue its efforts to reshape "Israeli" public opinion in favour of the "peace" agenda through various pressures that may reach implicating Netanyahu in another battle with the resistance factions and their activists, terrorising the population of "Israel", and holding them responsible for the consequences of supporting extremist religious parties.

As for the division of the holy sites that the storming of al-Masjid al-Aqsa by religious jews aims at, it means allocating specific times for Muslims to enter al-Masjid al-Aqsa , and other times for jews; that is, dividing the hours and days throughout the year between Muslims and jews, and allocating al-Masjid al-Aqsa to the jews during their 100-day holidays, in addition to all Saturdays throughout the year; and this is from a temporal perspective.

As for the spatial division, it means allocating certain areas and corners of Masjid al-Aqsa to each of the two parties. That is, converting parts of the mosque complex into synagogues in which prayers are held. This is the main purpose of the increasing incursions and the establishment of Talmudic prayers in the courtyards of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, especially with the growth of the Zionist "religious" movement for three decades, which has become a lever for extremist religious parties that influence the directions of "Israeli" governments and hinder the American agenda.

The importance of dividing the holy sites that "Israel" seeks to impose, and its danger to the fate of Palestine and its people, lies in extracting a recognition of the so-called "Israeli" right in Palestine, which is based on biblical allegations that do not stand up to the peremptory facts of the Qur'an, scientific data and the distorted biblical texts themselves, which restricted the "divine promise" to the children of "Israel" to worshiping God alone (according to their book), since despite our rejection of their allegations and their distorted book, they broke the covenant with their Lord according to the recognition of their distorted book itself.

Therefore, dividing the holy places does not only mean giving up Palestine and its sanctities, but also lending legitimacy to their false claims which call for their right to Palestine and their right to build their temple on the ruins of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, and the right of their cancerous state to exist on the land of Palestine, which is something that the Muslims, represented by every single sincere individual in the armies, leaders of the masses, and political organisations, should resolutely not allow to be endorsed by the traitorous regimes and puppet rulers.

Finally, it should be noted that the international hypocrisy, standpoints of denunciation, condemnation, weeping, and wailing practised by the Arab regimes over the storming of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque is a cheap investment in order to absorb the anger of Muslims. For definite, these actions are not in defence of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Blessed Land, nor what they call the "Palestinian right", and which is not designed to deter "Israel" from carrying out its terrorist activity against Palestine and its afflicted people, because the West's demands for "Israeli" compliance with "international legitimacy" is misleading, because that "international legitimacy" is the same one that granted "Israel" the legitimacy to occupy Palestine from the sea to the river, and because the denunciation and condemnation of the Arab rulers do not go beyond words, while in practice the alliance and normalisation with the Zionists is in full swing. The denunciation and condemnation proceed within the framework of acknowledging "Israel’s" "right" to most of the lands of Palestine, and within the framework of criminalising its resistance, preserving the alleged "Israeli" superiority over the Muslims, and showing it as an invincible state, and all this with the complicity of the puppet rulers, who suspended Jihad and even criminalised and prohibited it. Had it not been for their betrayal, the herds of cowardly extremists would not have dared to desecrate the sanctities of the Muslims and provoke their feelings.

11 Jumada al-Oola 1444h                                           hizbuttahrir.org
4 January 2023
 

Political Follow-up - Istanbul Mayor’s Jail Sentence And the Power Struggle in Turkey 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Political Follow-up - Istanbul Mayor’s Jail Sentence And the Power Struggle in Turkey

On Wednesday, December 14 an Istanbul court sentenced the mayor of Istanbul, Ekrem İmamoğlu, to two years, seven months, and fifteen days’ imprisonment, after he had been convicted of insulting members of the Supreme Election Commission in 2019 when he described them as "stupid."

The trial would not have had this considerable attention had it not been thrust into the context of the presidential race and the struggle for power in Turkey, as well as the significance of the opposition’s accession to power and its repercussions on domestic files such as the issue of constitutional amendments, the presidential system of government and the restoration of Western influence, and on regional files such as the Syrian issue, the Kurds and the US’s relinquishment of the “Erdogan” experiment with the Islamic tinge in favour of the liberal approach in the region.