Copyright 2008 T. Sheil & A. Sheil All Rights Reserved
The Non-Jihad
Though conflict between Europe and Islam goes back to the Crusades, the current round of disputes are of more recent origins. They derive indirectly from the Ottoman Empire, whose rulership of Arab lands caused resentment. Jihad was not an issue, as the Arabs and Turks were all Sunni Muslims. The problem was one of colonialism run by a corrupt government system.
By the late 18th Century, Turkey’s power waned due to outside pressures and inside corruption. The Ottoman government thrived on bribery and everything that went with it. Meanwhile, the Russian state emerged as an empire and as a powerful military threat to the Turks. Turkey also saw one of its key territories become a battleground for the wars between France and England. Egypt later was the stage for increasing European interests in the Middle East.
In the midst of this chaos came the rise of Arab nationalism. An educated man of peasant stock, Arabi Pasha became the leader of an Egyptian revolt against Turkish Rule and foreign influence. Arabi was the scion of a wealthy peasant family. He became an officer in the Egyptian Army. When Turkey threatened to make a law banning Egyptians from being officers, Arabi protested forcefully. The Turks retracted the law, but Arabi was not finished. He challenged the Turkish leaders. Arabi Pasha was able to inflame the people as well as the Army. He was an amazing orator. The Turkish ruler of Egypt, the Khedive, tried unsuccessfully to get help from Turkey to suppress the revolt
Britain entered the fray when the revolt hit Alexandria in 1881. Rioting mobs attacked foreigners and endangered British interests. A small war ensued, with Britain eventually defeating Arabi Pasha’s army. The Turks permitted Britain more control in Egypt. Eventually, Egypt became a British protectorate.
Arabi Pasha’s revolt was the first major instance of Arab nationalism. Though defeated, Arabi succeeded in getting things in motion. Within half a century, Arab nationalism would be a motivating factor in Middle Eastern politics.
Britain was able to get itself favorably ensconced in the Arab world. The English defended Egypt in the Sudan wars. British rule was far less capricious and corrupt than the Turks
Things were not as bright for the French, who had established colonies in Algeria and Morocco. A strong military presence was established due to frequent revolts and banditry.
Italy was a latecomer to colonialism. Having become a unified country in 1861, the Mediterranean nation tried to play “catch up.” Italy established colonies in Somalia and Eritrea It tried unsuccessfully to attack Abyssinia (Ethiopia). Unlike the orderly rule of Britain and France, Italy’s colonial government was inefficient, chaotic and corrupt. It was characterized by ineptitude rather than deliberate severity
Italy had economic interests on the coast of Africa. They were within Cyrenaica and Tripolitana. The region was part of the Ottoman Empire. The area is what we know today as Libya. In 1911, Italy started a war with Turkey so as to wrest control of the region. Beset by a revolt in the Balkans, Turkey was ill-prepared to handle Italian aggression. The war raged. Turkey enlisted the local tribes by stirring them up into a “jihad” against Italy.
By the end of World War I, Italy had gained ownership of Cyrenaica and Tripolitana. A truce was made with the local tribes, the Senussi, giving them virtual autonomy outside of the coastal area. Things remained peaceful until Mussolini came to power. Mussolini’s fascist waged a campaign against the Senussi. One tactic was to round up desert-dwelling Libyans and place them in camps. These poorly-run came became rife with disease and neglect. It is estimated that ¼ to ½ of the Libyan population died during the Italian campaign. The result was bristling Arab resentment against the colonial Italian rulership.
While Italy pursued its colonial dreams, England and France entered World War I. English forces launched a campaign against Turkish troops in Palestine. They enlisted local Arabs in the fight. Officers such as T.E. Lawrence were able to gain the loyalty of local Arab tribes. After years of Turkish domination, the Arabs saw this as a chance to rid themselves of Ottoman rule. The British promised the Arabs independence once the Turks were overthrown.
At the war’s end, the British failed to keep their promise. They set up colonial administrations in Palestine and Mesopotamia (Iraq), while the French took Syria and Lebanon. The Arabs felt betrayed. Naturally, the broken promises led to serious problems in the future.
Problems came soon enough. In the 1920s, Haj Amin al-Husseini was made Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. He was a former Turkish soldier who was later invovled in attacks Jewish settlers and British occupiers. Al-Husseini was given the title in hopes of stabilizing the area. Part of the reason was settling tribal rivalries.
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem proved to be a thorn in the side of British occupiers and Zionist settlers. When Britain signed the Balfour declaration, it agreed to help Jews create a homeland in parts of Palestine. The Palestinians were furious. In the Mufti they had a voice and an organizer. From his sanctuary in the mosque at the Dome of the Rock, the Mufti provoked revolts against British forces and raids against Jewish settlers. Britain could not touch him. The occupiers knew that to violate the Dome of the Rock would bring the ire of all of Islam. That meant strife in many places controlled by Britain, such as the Muslim states within its Indian colony. (These states comprise modern day Pakistan.) The Mufti was untouchable.
While the Mufti was preaching a pan-Muslim, anti British and anti Jewish ideology in Palestine, other forces were at work. Arab intellectuals gathered to form a pan-Arab, nationalist program. Its goal was to unite Arabs from Mauritania to Yemen with a mission of ousting foreign influence. The political ideology included many aspects of Socialism. They also adopted anti-Jewish sentiments, due mainly to the resentment toward incursion of Zionists into Arab Palestine. This was the to be the Baath party.
The Baathists found inspiration from Germany. With the advent of the Nazi government, the Arab intellectuals saw an ally. Here was a Socialist government that had a strong nationalistic ideology and a similar attitude toward a common target, Jews. The Nazis saw the Baathists as potential allies in both their campaign against Jews and future conflicts with Britain. Baathists saw Germany as an ideological model and a source of support.
The Mufti was also friendly with Germany. In 1936, he was forced to flee Jerusalem. Nazi money supported him. The Mufti moved to Lebanon, and then to Baghdad. It was there that he helped instigate a major revolt in 1941 which could have had disastrous results for Britain. One of the officers in the revolt was Saddam Hussein’s uncle.
The Iraqi Revolt had some Axis support. Germany and Italy sent a few planes into the region,. However, the British were able to quell it, although they never totally suppressed opposition. The Axis had never considered the Arabs or Iraq in strategic terms, and so missed an opportunity to cut British forces in North Africa from support from India.
The Mufti made his way to Berlin. His blend of anti-British sentiment and anti-Jewish activity was agreeable to the Nazis. The Mufti mobilized Muslims in the Balkans, especially Bosnia, to support German military activities. Bosnian Muslim troops were instrumental in oppressing Serbs and hunting down Jews. The infamous Handschar (Scimitar) Division wreaked havoc that left simmering hatred which eventually fueled the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s.
After World War II, the Mufti was again busy with Arab nationalistic activities. He was a major voice for Arab opposition to Israel in 1948. The loss of Palestinian territory to the Jews was a major blow. After 1948, the Mufti’s presence was less visible. Nonetheless, in his tenure he had been a great influence on Arab nationalism, anti-European sentiment and Arab attitudes toward the Jews. He had directly influenced the future of Iraq, Palestine and the Balkans. The Mufti also cemented the connection between Arab Nationalism and the Third Reich.
As an aside, the Mufti was also the uncle of Yasser Arafat.
Since the end of World War II, nationalism is a major factor in most Arab governments. Even the most Western-friendly have been influenced to some degree by the Baathists and the Mufti. They are aware of their status among their fellow Arab states.
Arab nationalism is a double-edged sword. It is a secular ideology, and so is intolerant of Islamic Fundamentalism. However, the nationalist leaders understand all too well how religious fervor can be used in their favor. They also know how unstable a weapon it can be.
Many aspects of these modern Arab states derive from the influences of the Baath party and the Mufti. For instance, ancient Jewish communities within Arab nations have fled when the new nationalist governments came to power. The hatred of Jews promoted by the Mufti and Baathists is part of the ideology of many Arab nationalist states.
Often overlooked is the role played by National Socialism in the development of modern Arab nationalist doctrine. The appeal of the German state of the 1930s becomes obvious when put in perspective. The Nazi government had restored Germany to economic and political power. It stood in opposition to the three forces which the Arabs regarded as inimical: Great Britain, France and Jews. Though a Socialist government, Nazism had promoted German nationalism to a fever pitch. No wonder it appealed to people seeking to build a Socialist state on a foundation of Arab Nationalism.
A sticking point is the racial issue. How could Arabs adopt the Aryan-based racial ideology of Nazism? They did not. They saw the Nazi ideology as a German government enforcing a German nationalism on its own people. The Arabs took this as a model for creating Arab nationalism in Arab states. Keep in mind that the Nazi regime a openly assisted the Arabs nationalists with money and political support. It was in the best interests of Germany at the time to have the Arabs as allies. Eichmann, Himmler and others openly encouraged the Arabs.
The influence was strong and pervasive. One factor that may deter us from making the connection with Nazism is the tendency of Arab states to ally with the Soviets. Indeed, the arsenals of Egypt, Syria and Iraq were all made in Russia. Russian experts worked on the Aswan dam. We might see an alliance with Communism, but the Arabs saw it as an alliance with someone opposed to their enemies. Many do not know that despite military, political and economic ties to the Soviets, most Arab states also banned home-grown Communist organizations.
One of those most influenced by Nazism was Saddam Hussein. His uncle had participated in the 1941 revolt and was an ardent admirer of the Mufti and the Nazis. The same uncle raised Saddam, encouraging him to study Mein Kampf, among other things. Saddam’s Iraq had many similarities to the Third Reich. Saddam made an Arab version rather than a carbon copy. A visible example is having his political officials dressed in military clothing. Though the Arab uniforms did not have the crisp lines of their Nazi counterparts, they served the same purpose.
One thing does not emerge among Arab nationalists: Jihad. The Arab nationalist states have been fastidious in suppressing Islamic Fundamentalism. The leaders know how to platy lip service to religion when necessary, but they do not tolerate any form of dissent. An Osama bin Laden could gain no foothold in Egypt, Syria or Iraq. While they may see Osama as a useful tool for irritating the West, they do not abide his kind at home. Note that most of Osama’s monetary support comes from religious states like Saudi Arabia rather than Nationalist nations.
Individual Jordanians and Syrians might join Osama as “foreign fighters,” but these are not representative of their respective states. They are religious-motivated people whom their homelands are glad to be rid of. A little-known fact is that those who return home are usually arrested and imprisoned. The nationalist states see these people as potential trouble makers.
The most radical of Arab nationalist movements never embraced Jihad. The Palestinian movement has always been a political and ethnic phenomenon whose avowed mission is to regain their homeland. Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Liberation Organization embraces both Muslim and Christian Palestinians. There is nothing religious about it. Likewise, even in its most radical days, the Libyan regime of Muammar Qaddafi did not espouse Jihad or Muslim Fundamentalism. Qaddafi’s backing of terrorist groups was limited to those with a political agendas, not a Jihad.
For all the Arab nationalist states' adherence to Socialism, they have not been economically successful. Oil exports account for most of the economy. Iraq was the most economically successful, and it also had the best oil reserves of them. The Arab states have been slow to industrialize. They face high unemployment, usually in the rage of 50%. With such a large percentage of idle people, much effort is spent to fend off dissent. Poorly educated, idle men are easily influenced by religious fanaticism and political rabble rousing. Here the Arab states do not accord with Nazi Germany. The Third Reich was able to quell much discord initially by improving the quality of life for its citizens. Economic strength and prosperity diminish cause for discord.. Arab states have not been able to develop strong economies that directly benefit the people.
When we try to unravel the mystery of Arab nationalism, we need look at its two main influences. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was perhaps the most influential Arab leader in the 20th Century. He inspired revolts and raids in Palestine, orchestrated a revolt in Iraq, brought Arab nationalists in touch with the Nazi leadership, openly helped Nazi forces recruit and employ Muslim troops, and inspired the leaders of emerging Arab Nationalist states. The other side of the coin is the work of the Arab intellectuals in developing an ideology. The Baath Party set the stage for the mechanism and doctrine of Arab nationalist states. These people were aided and influenced by high-ranking officials of the Third Reich.
The connections explain our own experiences with Arab states since 1948. For instance, Saddam’s Iraq was supposedly ready for a fall after the first Gulf War. That did not happen. Saddam bounced back quickly. Just as the Nazi Party bounced back after the Munich “Beer Hall Putsch,” so Saddam regained status as a leader. Saddam had a playbook to show him how to do it: Mein Kampf.
Saddam Hussein’s antics were not much different from Hitler’s. He used bluff and bluster, smoke and mirrors. Saddam was able to bolster his government’s forces with political cadres like the Fedayeen and the Republican Guard military elite. Any similarities to the Nazi SA and SS are not coincidental.
Evan after the war, similarities loom large. Many Iraqi insurgents are former members of the Baath party. They are not Al Qaeda jihadists. We ought not be surprised at this, as many high-ranking members embraced the ideology. Just as there were former Nazis who continued their activities after World War II, so it is that some Baathists would do the same. The remnants of the Iraqi Baath party will fade gradually rather than go away abruptly. To understand this, we need look at what happened to the Nazis after the War. Some gave up their ideology, some sought to work with the new government, and some remained unflinching Nazis.
Dealing with the remnants of the Iraqi Baath party should be nothing new. It is essentially the same as dealing with the remnants of Nazism in 1945. There will be holdouts. Of these, some will seek to perpetuate the party. They may do this at home or take their work to a sympathetic state. Others may actively fight on for years to come. Still others have reconciled themselves to the defeat, and have either dropped out of sight or cooperated with the new regime. Whether they cooperate or not, we need to realize the extent of influence that Baathism has enjoyed in Iraq. Baathism was able to unite Arabs across religious lines. Many of its strongest adherents were Arab Christians. Granted that membership also followed tribal lines, and that few Kurdish and Shiite Iraqis joined the party. Nonetheless, Baathism’s fallout will be felt in Iraq for many years.
Syrian Baathism has differences from its Iraqi counterpart. The two variants evolved differently in their respective nations. Internal conflicts experienced in Iraq did not happen in Syria. For the most part, Syrian and Iraqi Baathism have notable similarities. They derive from the same source and have the same attitudes toward Arab nationalism. Syrian Baathism also has its anti-Jewish component, made more prevalent because of ongoing conflicts with Israel.
Consider that Iraq’s Baath party went through several regimes before Saddam took power. By contrast, Syria’s leadership has remained within the same family. The Syrians appear more stable as a government and a dynasty. They have been busy exerting influence in Lebanon and challenging Israel. The inability to reach a binding accord with Israel is due in part to the anti-Jewish ideology within Baathism.
The repercussions have also been felt in Bosnia, not so much to Arab states as to the Mufti’s work. His cooperation with Nazism led to the creation of the Handschar SS Division, which wreaked havoc in the Balkans. Many atrocities against Jews and Serbs were blamed on the Bosnian SS unit. Marshall Tito’s take over of Yugoslavia put the brakes to ethnic tension, but his death let them re-emerge. The Serbian atrocities of the 1990s were explained as “payback” for the horrors perpetrated by the Handschar Division in the 1940s.
It is likely that we will be dealing with Arab nationalism and its Nazi roots for many years to come. An understanding of their ideology and motivating ideals makes it easier to come to terms with them. We need only look at the Mufti and Baathists to see their origins
Jihad is the way of the religious fanatic and the poor. It is an ideology with appeal to theocratic Muslim states and disaffected individuals within the lower classes of other Arab nations. Arab nationalism is a very different thing. It is a secular political doctrine that combines socialism with a pan-Arab ideology. The two may seem to emerge from a similar place, but in fact they are opposed to one another. Jihad is a greater threat to Arab nationalist states than to us. To them it means revolution that can lead to civil war. For us, it is an outside phenomenon that does not have the means to overthrow our government or our secular society.
Dealing with both Jihad and Arab states should be no mystery. We have seen this before, in other places, and we have dealt with it. Once again, a sense of history gives us the tools to comprehend and deal with both.
If you love our Magazine, you will love Uncle Thor's Lessons, Anecdotes and Humor. A daily message for Heathens and Pagans. A wonderful thought for the day, every day!
If you buy gifts, make Heathen products a priority. Heathen- and Pagan-owned businesses rely on the support of the community. Keep it Heathen by buying Heathen.
For articles, downloads, online classes and archives of past issues, see our main site: Uncle Thor's Artillery Park at http://www.thortrains.com/UncleThors/index.html
***
To email us, use thortrains@comcast.net
