Rabu, 25 November 2009 | 23.38

Kurban ( Qurbân ) memiliki arti dekat atau mendekatkan. Secara khusus istilah ini berarti penyembelihan binatang ternak pada hari raya Idul Adha atau tiga hari sesudahnya , yaitu tanggal 10, 11, 12, dan 13 Zulhijjah dalam rangka mendekatkan diri kepada Allah SWT.

Selain kata kurban, dalam kosa kata bahasa Indonesia kita mengenal kata-kata akrab, karib dan kerabat yang semuanya berasal dari kata yang sama dan mengandung makna kedekatan.

Qurbân dikenal juga dengan istilah udh-hiyah ( menyembelih binatang di waktu matahari sedang naik di pagi hari atau waktu dhuha ) yang berasal dari kata dhahwah atau dhuha .

Qurbân disebut juga nahr . Kata ini berasal dari ayat Al-Quran yang menjadi dasar hukum pelaksanaan kurban, yaitu yang artinya:

“Sesungguhnya Kami telah memberikan kepadamu nikmat yang banyak. Maka dirikanlah shalat karena Tuhanmu; dan berkurbanlah. Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang membenci kamu dialah yang terputus.” ( QS. Al-Kautsar [ 108 ] : 1 – 3 ).

Dalam ayat lain Allah berfirman, yang artinya :

”Dan telah Kami jadikan untuk kamu unta-unta itu sebahagian dari syi’ar Allah, kamu memperoleh kebaikan yang banyak padanya, maka sebutlah olehmu nama Allah ketika kamu menyembelihnya dalam keadaan berdiri ( dan telah terikat ). Kemudian apabila telah roboh ( mati ), maka makanlah sebahagiannya dan beri makanlah orang yang rela dengan apa yang ada padanya ( yang tidak meminta-minta ) dan orang yang meminta. Demikianlah Kami telah menundukkan unta-unta itu kepada kamu, mudah-mudahan kamu bersyukur.”   ( QS. Al-Hajj [22] : 36 ).

Sementara itu Rasulullah SAW menegaskan :

“ Barangsiapa yang  berada  dalam  kelapangan ( mampu berkurban ), lalu tidak menyembelih kurban, maka janganlah ia mendekati tempat shalatku.” ( HR Ahmad dan Ibnu Majah ).

Atas dasar ayat-ayat dan hadis di atas para ulama berbeda pendapat tentang hukum kurban ini. Abu Hanifah ( Imam Hanafi ), misalnya, menyatakan menyembelih kurban hukumnya wajib. Kewajiban ini berlaku setiap tahun bagi yang bermukin ( menetap ). Tetapi mayoritas ulama seperti Imam Syafi’i, Imam Maliki, dan Imam Hanbali menyatakan bahwa hukum berkurban itu tidak wajib,  tapi  sunnah  muakkad  ( sunnah yang dikuatkan , yang sangat dianjurkan ).

Mayoritas ulama berpandangan mengenai kesunnahannya ini berdasarkan hadis Rasulullah SAW yang artinya :

“Bahwa Rasulullah SAW pernah bersabda apabila kamu melihat hilâl ( awal bulan ) Zulhijjah dan salah seorang di antara kamu ingin berkurban, hendaklah ia menahan ( diri dari memotong ) rambut dan kuku-kukunya ( binatang yang akan dikurbankan )”. ( HR Jamaah, kecuali Bukhari ).

Pendapat bahwa kurban tidak wajib didasarkan pada kalimat : “salah seorang di antara kamu ingin berkurban.” Tentu bagi yang melakukannya lebih baik.

Dalam hadis lain, Rasulullah SAW juga menegaskan bahwa :

“Ada tiga hal yang wajib atasku dan sunnah bagi kamu, yaitu : shalat witir, kurban,  dan  shalat  dhuha’  ( HR Ahmad, Al-Hakim, dan Daru Qutni ).

Dengan hadis-hadis itulah para ulama berpandangan bahwa hukum melaksanakan ibadah kurban ini sunnah muakkad.

Ada beberapa ketentuan berkurban sebagai berikut :

1. Orang yang melakukan kurban hendaklah seorang Muslim yang merdeka ( bukan budak ), balig, berakal, dan menurut Abu Hanifah, harus orang yang bermukim ( bukan musafir ). Tapi menurut mazhab lain tetap sah jika musafir melaksanakan ibadah kurban.

2. Setiap Muslim yang mampu harus melaksanakan kurban dengan menyembelih seekor kambing atau domba, atau seekor sapi / unta untuk tujuh orang bersama-sama. Binatang tersebut harus disediakan tanpa mengutang.

3. Binatang yang sah untuk kurban harus yang sehat, tidak boleh cacat atau kurus, serta harus yang sudah cukup umur, yaitu untuk kambing / domba harus sudah berumur satu tahun, sapi atau kerbau dua tahun, dan unta sudah berumur lima tahun.

4. Penyembelihan dilakukan setelah selesai menjalankan shalat Id pada hari raya Idul Adha,  yang juga disebut  yaum al-nahr ( hari penyembelihan kurban ) ,  atau  pada hari-hari  tasyriq ( ayyam al-tasyriq ), yaitu tiga hari setelah hari raya Idul Adha.

5. Orang yang berkurban dianjurkan untuk menyembelih sendiri atau melihatnya pada waktu penyembelihan. Maksudnya binatang untuk berkurban itu jangan diserahkan begitu saja kepada orang lain. Kita harus mengetahui dulu orang yang kita tugaskan untuk melaksanakan penyembelihan itu betul-betul orang yang amanah. Bisa saja pembagian daging kurbannya tidak tepat sasaran. Hal ini sering terjadi, ada yang miskin tidak kebagian, tapi justru yang mampu mendapatkannya.

6. Daging kurban itu harus dibagi-bagikan kepada fakir miskin . Mazhab Hanafi, Maliki, dan Hanbali menyatakan boleh memakannya sedikit daging kurban itu, kecuali kurban yang dinazarkan. Menurut ulama Mazhab Hanafi , memakan kurban yang dinazarkan adalah haram. Sedangkan ulama mazhab Maliki dan Hanbali membolehkannya. Tetapi menurut ulama Mazhab Syafi’i, kurban yang dinazarkan tidak boleh dimakan dagingnya, tetapi kurban biasa ( kurban yang sunnah ) hukumnya sunnah untuk memakan sebagian kecil dagingnya. Hal ini didasarkan pada ayat 36 Surah Al -Hajj seperti telah disebutkan di atas. Juga didasarkan pada hadis yang diriwatkan Baihaki : “Bahwa Rasulullah SAW memakan hati hewan kurbannya.”

Ajaran berkurban ini sebenarnya sama tuanya dengan sejarah kehidupan manusia. Kedua anak Nabi Adam, yaitu Qabil dan Habil, bertikai tentang suatu hal, dan Allah menyuruh mereka berkurban untuk membuktikan siapa yang benar dalam pertikaian itu. Dan ternyata kurban Habil yang diterima. Karena Habil berkurban dengan ikhlas untuk melaksanakan perintah Allah, sedangkan Qabil berkurban dengan tujuan untuk memenangkan pertikaian itu. Hal ini diungkapkan dalam Al-Quran, yang artinya :

“Ceritakanlah kepada mereka kisah kedua putera Adam (Habil dan Qabil) menurut yang sebenarnya, ketika keduanya mempersembahkan korban, maka diterima  dari  salah   seorang  dari  mereka berdua ( Habil ) dan tidak diterima dari yang lain ( Qabil ). Ia berkata ( Qabil ): “Aku pasti membunuhmu!.” Berkata Habil: “Sesungguhnya Allah hanya menerima ( korban ) dari orang-orang yang bertakwa.” ( QS Al-Maidah [5] : 27 ).

Sedangkan asal usul kurban yang disunnahkan dalam Islam itu berawal dari peristiwa kurban Nabi Ibrahim AS. Diawali dari mimpi Nabi Ibrahim yang mendapat perintah Allah untuk menyembelih anaknya, Ismail. Nabi Ibrahim berkeyakinan mimpinya itu merupakan mimpi yang benar, maka ia menanyakannya kepada Ismail AS:

“Hai anakku sesungguhnya aku melihat dalam mimpi bahwa aku menyembelihmu. Maka fikirkanlah apa pendapatmu!” Ia menjawab: “Hai bapakku, kerjakanlah apa yang diperintahkan kepadamu; insya Allah kamu akan mendapatiku termasuk orang-orang yang sabar.” (QS. Ash-Shaffat [37]: 102 ).

Kemudian Nabi Ibrahim AS membawa Ismail ke suatu tempat sunyi di Mina. Dengan berserah diri kepada Allah SWT, Ismail dibaringkan dan segera Ibrahim AS mengarahkan pisaunya ke leher sang anak. Setelah terbukti kesabaran dan ketaatan Nabi Ibrahim dan Ismail AS maka Allah melarang menyembelih Ismail dan untuk meneruskan kurban, Allah menggantinya dengan seekor sembelihan ( domba yang besar ).

“ Dan Kami tebus anak itu dengan seekor sembelihan yang besar.” (QS. Ash-Shaffat [37]: 107 ).

Peristiwa inilah yang menjadi dasar disyariatkannya kurban, yang hingga sekarang ini dilaksanakan oleh setiap Muslim yang mampu. Wallahu ‘alam bi ash-shawab.

Gambar : IslamOnline.net

Yesterday I was reading parts of an article on Mas’ud regarding the evidence for Sadl in the Maliki prayer. When I came across this:

Imam Malik and the Madinans have added another criterion to accepting the khabar al-wahid apart from what which is mention in relation to Imam ash-Shafi’i and Ahmad: that the hadith in question does not conflict with the ‘amal of ahl al-Madina.

The ‘amal of ahl al-Madina as a juristic principle states what Malik mentioned above, that Madina is the inheritor of the sunnah of the Prophet and the sunnah of the Sahabah, and hence the entire city is the visual legacy of the Prophetic Sunnah. The proofs are the ayat stated above, along with ahadith:

My community will not agree on an error.

and

Madina is sacred, and throws out its dross as fire cast out the dross of metal.

and

Islam will cling to Madina as a serpent clings to its hole.

Today the People of Najd (Aka the Salafis/Wahabis) control the Blessed City of Medina. Those who have had the gracious opportunity to visit the city will know of the incessant policing carried out by the religious authorities in the city, which is most highly visible at the blessed grave of our Master Muhammad (SAWS) and Jannat al-Baqi. The repeated phrases of “Bida’a! Bida’a! Shirk! Shirk!” are heard constantly around these areas.

The main reason why they put individuals in these areas in the first place is to stop large numbers of people carrying out what they believe in their opinion are incorrect “idolatrous” practices. While there are people who will do things that they shouldn’t, the majority of what they try to stop people from doing are on the whole accepted by Orthodox Islam.

Now if we put the Ahadith I mentioned into this context, that the city as a whole will cling to the true form of Islam, that incorrectness and heresy do not exist in the city, then who is in the wrong and the right? The majority of the Muslim Ummah are doing things which they believe, and rightly so, are absolutely fine to do, but this small minuscule minority of Muslims are trying to stop them. It’s like a stone in the middle of an ocean, staying put and refusing to move but all the while waves are crashing down upon it from all directions.

The opinion of the majority is correct according to the Prophet (SAWS) which over the course of history has proven true. Yet the Najdis believe they are Ahl al-Sunnah wa’al-JAMA’A…I think given what they keep trying to stop people from doing shows the opposite. This alone is evidence I think to disprove the school of Muhammad ibn Abdal Wahab.

But that’s just me.

Je fais pas ca d’habitude, mais là…

je vous conseille tres tres fortement d’aller voir le dernier strip de Maliki !

Marrant comme toujours, tellement vrai, et ces costumes !!! waow !

coup de coeur spécial pour celui ci

Iraq is right back where it was after Bush\’s so called first \”win\’ there.…In that case remember……the Saddam Hussein people having suffer a loss to America in a straight out military action turned to tried, and true action employed be others (notably in by the Palestain’s in Israel) …of bombings…….

Well in the last week, we\’ve gone back there……the country is busy trying to get ready for election  and the United States wants to make sure everyone knows that they are pulling out ‘combat troops’……

For two reasons Obama is happy to go that way…..Because he’s gonna send more troops next door to Afghanistan…and because he can have a big campaign promise for filled in 2012, when he runs again……but things are never that easy…are they?

We all know that the US is never gonna get rid of all the troops in Iraq…as a matter of fact Nouri al-Maliki, the countries Prime Minister has announced a few weeks ago that the Iraqi’s are not gonna hold the US to it’s withdrawal date of 2011….( Obama still said a few day’s ago we’ll have the combat troops out on time, don’t bet on it)……..

With this campaign, as we see, we are back to the juggling by the different factions in the country for power…. While enjoying the last year as a mostly stable place, Iraq, as other countries in the Middle East, has more of the ‘iron fist’ method of working its politics, than the relative peaceful bickering in the Europe, Asia and the America’s…….

Stay tuned……

Originally uploaded by Muhammad Adnan Asim ( linkadnan ) # 2

in australia, you can get away for egging your prime minister for being an arrogant, bigotted, idiotic prick but this guy got jailed for throwing a shoe at a pathetic, boofhead murderer…bush was lucky he only got a shoe and not an eye-for-an-eye for what he had committed…

as hilarious and heroic it may be, it is sad to see how low/subservient the arab/muslim world has become to resort to something as juvenile, trivial to take a stand and speak out against injustice, when by islam we have an obligation to do so as Allah loves the just…is our iman/faith so weak that we paralyse and cripple when it comes to denouncing such wrong and criminality in this world? don’t just blame bush, all our leaders for the chaos thats surrounding us, blame ourselves for not having the courage to take that crutial step to stop a wrong…

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jVLyMfz24UHwB7RZrnMiwnTkD6HQD9ANL3RO1

Iraqi who threw shoes at Bush to be freed
By HAMZA HENDAWI (AP) – 8 hours ago

BAGHDAD — The Iraqi reporter who threw his shoes at former President George W. Bush in a stunning act of protest is to be released from prison Tuesday and will fly to Greece a day later for medical checkups and because he has concerns for his safety, his brother said.

Muntadhar al-Zeidi was to have been freed Monday, but the release was held up because of delays processing paperwork. On Tuesday morning, one of his lawyers, Karim al-Shujairi, said a judge has signed all the necessary papers, clearing the way for his release after nine months.

Al-Zeidi’s relatives gathered at the family’s apartment in a rundown two-story building in central Baghdad where they have been preparing for days to welcome him, hanging balloons and posters of the reporter.

The little-known reporter for a small Iraqi TV station gained instant hero status in the Arab world last December when he hurled his shoes at Bush as he stood next to Iraq’s prime minister at a Baghdad news conference.

“This is your farewell kiss, you dog!” he shouted at Bush in Arabic as he hurled the shoes. “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq,” he continued.

For days, the scene was played endlessly on regional and international TV channels.

Al-Zeidi’s words stirred millions across the Arab world who have been captivated and angered by images of destruction and grieving since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

At the family’s home, his brother Uday said al-Zeidi would travel to Athens for medical checkups and because he was worried about his safety in Iraq.

“He fears for his life,” Uday said.

On Tuesday morning, a crowd of about 50 journalists and TV crews gathered outside the family’s home in a commercial district of the capital. Several children from the family carried posters of al-Zeidi that said: “Release the man who restored national unity.”

There were also about a dozen sheep and a butcher standing by to slaughter some of them upon al-Zeidi’s return in a traditional practice on celebratory occasions.

The reporter’s brother Uday told reporters that al-Zeidi was collecting his personal belongings and will shortly be on his way home.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article6835655.ece
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/world/middleeast/16shoe.html?bl&ex=1253160000&en=4a6d3f6f9f183e9c&ei=5087%0A

BUT SOME DON’T AGREE LIKE THIS GUY HERE…NO SURPRISES AS TO WHY
http://www.jewcy.com/post/why_muntadhar_alzaidi_no_%E2%80%98hero%E2%80%99

FT.com / Iraq – Iraq coalition excludes PM Maliki

Iraq’s major Shia parties announced a new coalition on Monday that excludes Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister, a development that will probably force him to join forces with non-traditional allies if he seeks to keep his job after parliamentary elections in January.

If the coalition remains intact and secures a majority of seats in the January 16 vote, Iraq’s next government will probably be run by leaders with deep ties to Iran, which would considerably curb American influence as US troops continue to withdraw.

…The Shia coalition will be led by the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, a conservative party that is among Iran’s closest allies in Iraq. It also includes the staunchly anti-American Sadr movement, as well as a few Sunni groups.

Mr Maliki’s Dawa party will not be part of the group because alliance leaders refused to guarantee that he would remain prime minister if the coalition secured a majority of seats.

Related:
An unsatisfactory end-game in Iraq. Just last January, in provincial elections, Maliki’s allies did extremely well, while the Iranian backed faction did poorly. What changed? Plainly, it was the security situation. Why did it change? In large part because American forces pulled back from the cities and Maliki has been reluctant to call for their help. As Max Boot notes, Maliki compounded the problem through foolishly over-confident measures like taking down concrete barriers in Baghdad.
To be sure, Maliki’s push to lessen the American presence helped account for his popularlity in the first instance. But he may discover that, though a clever move in the short-term, his approach to the U.S. ultimately was a bad bet for his political career, not to mention his country.
Behind the carnage in Baghdad. Iran’s links with Maliki are so close, said this Iraqi intelligence source, that the prime minister uses an Iranian jet with an Iranian crew for his official travel. The Iranians are said to have sent Maliki an offer to help his Dawa Party win at least 49 seats in January’s parliamentary elections if Maliki will make changes in his government that Iran wants.

Iraq and Syria have had a not so great relationship over the past number of decades. The two countries were governed by competing branches of the pan-Arab Baathist movement, and ties have been largely antagonistic. Relations were severed in 1982 during Saddam Hussein’s rule and soon after the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war. Later, Syria joined the anti-Saddam coalition that liberated Kuwait from Iraqi occupation in the 1991 Gulf War.

Since the American liberation of Iraq, Syria has been a launching ground for terrorist operations in Iraq. The vast majority of bombings in Iraq were carried out by Al Qaida operatives and other non-Iraqi jihadists based in neighbouring states like Syria, which became a hub for terrorists like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his network of operatives.

In 2006 Iraq and Syria restored diplomatic relations and have since established a number of economic agreements.

But relations have broken down once again, despite PM Maliki’s security focused visit to Syria less than two weeks ago.

Maliki’s government accuses Syria of harbouring terrorists behind the August 19 attacks in Baghdad which killed more than 200 and injured many hundreds more. In a televised confession, Wisam Ali Khazim Ibrahim, the so-called mastermind behind the attacks, issued a televised confession in which he detailed the order to execute the operation by a man in Syria who wanted the attacks “to shake the administration.” Information leaked by Iraqi security to the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai says that one car used in the explosion is registered in Syria.

Syrian facilitation of militants across its borders and into Iraq and its safe haven for them is therefore still a problem.

The tit-for-tat rhetoric and aggressive posturing is taking place as usual. Maliki has told Syria that it could harbour anti-Syrian elements just as Syria hosts anti-Iraq militants, according to yesterday’s Al-Sharq al-Awsat. According to Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh, writes the paper, Syria has rejected an Iraqi government proposal for a strategic agreement which provides for the extradition of terrorist groups operating in Syria. Iraq has a list of names for extradition but Syria has rejected it.

Tensions will not have helped US-Syria relations either. Washington has been concerned about terrorists infiltrating Iraq from Syria since 2003. A senior delegation of U.S. military commanders visited Damascus on August 13 for talks on curbing the flow of terrorists into Iraq; tellingly, Syrian state-television didn’t even report the visit. But with both states recalling their ambassadors, it is unclear whether any such dialogue between the three states will be resumed any time soon.

Also possible is that this is all just Maliki’s attempt to cover up his government’s security failures. Taking away security barriers that could have saved lives was a complacent and negligent act. Speaking to Al-Arabiya, Amman Salman al-Jumayli, member of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Iraqi Council of Representatives, believes Iran may be complicit in the attacks. Iran sponsors, supports, funds and influences most of Iraq’s Shia movement, political or otherwise. Countless weapons caches, missiles, and IEDs are believed to have emanated from Tehran.

The matter could become an electoral issue come the national elections in January, should it continue unresolved that is. Iraqiya news channel reported Al-Fadila (Islamic Virtue Party) calls for Syria to extradite Baath party leaders exiled in Syria. Al-Fadila is a discredited Shia offshoot Sadrist movement led by Abdelrahim Al-Husseini. It’s notorious for being a mainly thuggish group responsible for robbing and extorting the population of Basra province where senior Fadila leader Mohammed al-Waili served as governor until April 2007 when ISCI successfully brought a no-confidence motion against him. Basra’s electorate punished and marginalised Fadila in last January’s provincial elections; the party won only 1 of 35 seats. Fadila will not be part of the new Shia coalition, the Iraqi National Alliance.

Al hamdulillahi Rabbil alameen, was salaatu was salaamu ala Sayyidil Ambiya e wal Mursaleen, Sayyidina wa Shafee enaa wa Nabiyyinaa wa Maulaana Muhammadiw, wa alaa Aalihi wa Sahbihi wa Ahli Baytihi wa Awliyaa’ihi ajma’eena Birahmatika yaa Arhamar Rahimeen

Es tauchen immer wieder die märchenhaften Aussagen auf , welche besagen :
“Ach ihr Muslime , fastet doch nur um damit eigentliche Diätfastenkur zu praktizieren “.
Welch glücklicher Zufall , dass ein Nichtmuslim dies den Muslimen erstmal erklären musste , damit sie den Sinn des Fastens überhaupt verstehen

Daher das nun etwas doch ernste Thema dazu :
“Warum unterscheidet sich das Islamische Fastengebot & deren praxis von den anderen verschiedenen des Fastens ?”

Das islamische ( Gebot & Befehl ) des Fastens ist grundsätzlich verschieden zu den sogenannten Heilfasten & Diätplänen , denn es beinhaltet zahlreiche 6 nutzbringende Charakteristiken & sein vereinender Nutzen sind auf die folgenden Faktoren zurückzuführen :

1. Vergleicht man das Fasten im ramadan mit anderen Diätplänen , so wird wird schnell offensichtlich , da es keine Malnutrition oder inadäquate Kalorieneinnahme , da es auch eine keine Beschränkung bzgl. des Typus oder Menge des Essenseinahme während des iftaar oder sahaar .

Was wiederum durch Dr. M. M. Hussaini im Journal Medical Association im Oktober 1982 bestätigt wurde , als er sich mit der Diätanalyse der muslimischen Studenten von North Dakota University at Fargo befasste

2. Das Fasten im Ramadan wird zweifelsfrei freiwillig praktiziert , daher ist es auch kein verschriebenes Rezept von einem anerkannten Arzt .
Im Teil des Hypothalamus des Gehirns befindet sich ein Zentrum namens Lipostat , welcher das Körpergewicht kontrolliert .
Wenn es nun zu unverhältnismäßigen schnellerem Gewichtsverlust , so erkennt der Lipostat dies als nicht normal , also reagiert er mit gegenmaßnahmen , damit das normale gewicht wiederhergestellt wird .
Wobei der Sinn & Zweck zunichte gemacht wird .So wäre es der einzig effektive Weg des Gewichtsverlusts , dass jener langsam ,selbstkontrolliert vonstatten geht & mit graduellem Gewichtsverlust einhergehend durch die Modifizierung unseres eigenen Verhaltens wird die Haltung zu exzessivem Essen dadurch eliminiert .Daher ist der Monat Ramadan der Monat der Selbstregulierung & ein (verpflichtendes ) Training des Selbst , wobei durch dieses Verhalten der zeitbedingten Reduzierung der Esseneinnahme wird hoffentlich auch der Lipostat eine permanente Veränderung registieren wollen .

Quelle :
http://www.crescentlife.com/spiritua…#095;fasting.htm

ws

UPDATE: Former Police Chief of Saddam Hussein Confesses to Finance Ministry Attack

CNN
August 24, 2009

Iraqi officials Sunday released what they called a confession from a man identified as a former Baathist police official, who says he helped organize one of last week’s attacks on government buildings in Baghdad.

Read Full Article Here

Iraqi FM: Baghdad bombings possible inside job

AP
August 22, 2009

He says the ministry is also looking into how the trucks carrying the bombs were allowed to pass into areas where they are banned from traveling.

Para analistas, políticas de reconciliação e segurança de Maliki falharam (matéria publicada no Estadão de hoje)

Mariana Della Barba e Roberto Simon

Os atentados de ontem no Iraque voltaram a expor os dois maiores fracassos do primeiro-ministro Nuri al-Maliki, eleito há três anos. Para especialistas ouvidos pelo Estado, Bagdá foi incapaz de promover uma reconciliação política que reduzisse a tensão sectária e de garantir a segurança da população. O resultado é ameaçador: um Estado deslegitimado diante de uma insurgência organizada.

“Os ataques provam que o governo de Maliki e seu Exército não encontraram uma maneira de combinar reconciliação e segurança”, afirmou Juan Cole, professor de história do Oriente Médio da Universidade de Michigan.

Promessa de campanha de Maliki, o diálogo entre muçulmanos xiitas, sunitas e curdos não conduziu a uma partilha real do poder. Desde 2006, xiitas, como o próprio Maliki, dominam o aparato estatal – incluindo as forças de segurança – e sunitas, apesar de sua participação nas eleições regionais de janeiro, continuam sub-representados.

“Maliki governa de maneira sectária”, disse Matthew Duss, do instituto de pesquisa Center for American Progress. “A hegemonia xiita, inevitavelmente, empurra os sunitas para os braços de grupos inspirados pela Al-Qaeda.”

O professor de Michigan ainda aponta para a “artificialidade” da política de segurança iraquiana. “Você não pode colocar bairros inteiros atrás de barreiras e postos de controle para sempre. Isso destrói a economia. Sem lidar com a raiz da violência, ela voltará”, afirma.

Os dois especialistas concordam que dificilmente a violência atrapalhará os planos da Casa Branca de encerrar a guerra. Firmado em novembro, o acordo de retirada entre Washington e Bagdá prevê a saída de todas as tropas até dezembro de 2011 – uma promessa de campanha do presidente dos EUA, Barack Obama.

Em janeiro, os iraquianos votarão em um referendo sobre a possibilidade de adiantar essa data em um ano. Tropas de combate dos EUA já deixaram as principais cidades do país em junho.

Para Duss, embora a insurgência sunita ainda seja capaz de promover carnificinas, ela não pode levar o governo “ao colapso”. A improvável queda do regime, segundo Cole, seria a “única coisa capaz de fazer os EUA mudarem seus planos”.

Patrocinada por Maliki, a campanha pela saída dos EUA tem forte apoio popular – a retirada das cidades foi feriado nacional – e Bagdá é contra mudanças no cronograma.

“Não há desejo em nenhum dos governos (EUA e Iraque) nem é politicamente concebível uma mudança nos planos de retirada”, afirma Lydia Khalil, especialista em Oriente Médio que trabalhou como conselheira no governo provisório americano no Iraque. No entanto, os dois países não “bolaram um ‘plano B’ para usar caso a violência aumente”, completa.

Army Col. Timothy R. Reese says it’s time for the U.S. to “declare victory” in Iraq and “go home.” According to Colonel Reese, chief of the Baghdad Operations Command Advisory Team, the surge’s real objectives still haven’t been met and never will be.

In a recent memorandum, Reese asserts that “the ineffectiveness and corruption” of Iraq’s government ministries is “the stuff of legend.”

Even Reese isn’t all that committed about U.S. forces leaving Iraq. In his memo, he says that during the withdrawal period the U.S. and Iraqi governments “should develop a new strategic framework agreement that would include some lasting military presence at 1-3 large training bases, airbases, or key headquarters locations.”

Meanwhile at a July 23 appearance at the United States Institute of Peace in Washington, Iraqi President Maliki opened the door for indefinite U.S. presence in his country, saying, “If Iraqi forces need more training and support, we will reexamine the agreement at that time, based on our own national needs.”

This “lasting military presence” has been the objective of the neoconservatives all along. The neocons’ Pax Americana vision has translated into the Pentagon’s “long war,” a strategy that does not seek to win wars but rather to create a sequel to the Cold War in which Islamofacism substitutes for communism and puny Iran, whose defense budget is less than one percent of ours, replaces the Soviet juggernaut.

All the talk about withdrawing from Iraq is an Orwellian card trick. Reese says our “lasting military presence” should not “include the presence of any combat forces save those for force protection needs or the occasional exercise.” Why would we need to leave noncombat forces behind? So they can cook and clean for the combat forces that provide them force protection? The exercises we might do with the Iraqis would involve practicing for the invasions of Iran and Syria, which is the real reason the warmongery wants to keep an enduring base of operations in Iraq. There’s no need to conduct defensive exercises. None of Iraq’s neighbors is capable of invading and occupying it or crazy enough to try.

[Excerpt of an article by retired U.S. Navy Commander Jeff Huber, writing in the American Conservative]

After President Bush’s apt ducking of two shoes thrown straight at him, the State of Texas announced that a shoe rack will heretofore be called a Shoeraq in memory of the incident and spelled as one word. Those hunting trips Bush took with Dick Cheney in Texas were a hell of a good training. If nothing fatal came out of dodging bullets thrown at him, they sure developed excellent reflexes in Bush. In Iraq, the government decided that the pair of shoes thrown at Bush will be auctioned and the billion dollar proceeds be sent out to GM, Ford and Chrysler as a first bailout handout so that their poor CEOs can fly back to Congress on private jets and ask for more money.

Shoe pride is now high in the Middle East which plans to advertise its shoes as the only ones that can demonstrably and reliably follow a straight throw-line to the individual in target. The boom in shoe exports soon to follow this world-class demonstration is the perfect solution to the desperate need for countries in the Middle East to diversify their oil-based economies and offer traditional new ways for young people there to express themselves.

Within minutes of the incident being reported and with the Pope’s blessing, the Holy Shoe Trinity of Ferragamo, Prada and Bruno Magli announced plans to set up shoe manufacturing in Iraq. Unfortunately the shoes that were thrown at Bush were too cheap a brand to be auctioned at Christie’s and fetch the trillion dollar amounts needed to bail out the US economy.

The Iraqi government announced that all journalists in Iraq will be given Italian brands to shoeraq freely against foreign dignitaries with an exception made for Carla Bruni because she still is too God-damn pretty and because she was hired to advertise the shoes in a new commercial where she and Sarkozy will be shown quarreling. At some point Carla will take off her shoes and throw them at petit Nicola who being so petit won’t have to duck down to avoid the hit. The commercial will close by Carla singing “Some fights you don’t wanna miss”

In a show of accord with this gracious decision to exempt Carla from Shoeraq, the Vatican requested that devil-wearing Prada design special protest-shoes with angel wings on the side for use by protesters when new priest-in-child scandals break out. This is how the new design will be used to the Church’s favor. By mastering his God-intermediation powers the Pope will animate the wings attached to the shoes turning the shoe-throwing protests into a massive up-the-sky dove-release spectacle. Those protesters who refuse to use the Pope-animated Devil-wears-Prada shoes will be denied a fair hearing postmortem.

Religious-devout Iran who has tremendous spiriticopolitical influence over Iraq also announced that when a persona non grata visits Iraq from a country well-versed in the Satan, female journalists will be invited to attend the press conference. Under special fatwa from resurrect-elect Khomeini, all female journalists present will wear stiletto heels with the clear understanding that they’ll use them to Shoeraq the foreign dignitary but not miss him next time.

Finally, fashion-conscious protesters in democracy-born Greece who are in the streets for a second week and bored sick of throwing rocks and Molotov bombs to the police are inspired anew by Shoeraq and vow to compete head-on with the Middle East on riot publicity. They believe Bush was actually controlled by the CIA and that’s why he maneuvered so fast and dodged the shoe. Down with the CIA controlling our leaders they cry. Shoe stores in Athens are busy placing massive orders of Middle East shoes in response to the high demand from angry left-wing protesters who now want to burn down Athens shoe-style.

Don’t you just love to read the news Bush makes when he travels abroad? By getting himself into the most unimaginable situations, it helps fire up people’s imagination everywhere. By ducking successfully the shoe throw and letting the journalist go free for exercising his freedom of speech, Bush finally unveiled his version of how democracy will spread in the Middle East. I throw guns at you, duck it if you can. You throw shoes at me, I sure duck it well!!

I am ashamed to joke like that but compared to Bush, Obama might end up being a very boring, uneventful and yes here is my shame, less colorful US president…

http://www.thinkaloo.com

I published my maiden op-ed in the Boston Globe today, on Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s rise to power and the risks he might pose for the United States:

IRAQI Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s recent visit with President Obama clearly revealed something that Americans should note: the emergence of the most powerful political figure in the country since Saddam Hussein. As Iraq transitions from a country under occupation to one with restored sovereignty – and one that now obliges the United States to remove combat troops from the country by 2012 – Maliki probably will flex his political muscles and make more and bolder independent decisions. His ascendancy should give the Obama administration pause, as he might have become what the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate termed the “Shia strongman’’ who would replace the political vacuum left by the removal of Saddam.

Maliki’s journey to power was far from certain, even a few years ago. As an exile who lived in Syria and Iran since the late 1970s, Maliki commanded the Dawa Party’s Damascus branch and worked with Shia insurgents to fight against Saddam Hussein. After the US invasion in 2003, Maliki took a role in the de-Baathification Commission for the interim Iraqi government, a process that did not endear him to much of Iraq’s Sunni population, who viewed it as a sectarian purge.

A consensus candidate for prime minister in 2006, his major qualification was that he was a bit more likeable and more politically palatable than his predecessor. At the time, many US policymakers dismissed him as a second-rate leader, soon to leave the political stage. A late-2006 leaked memo from National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley explicitly portrayed Maliki as ineffective, naïve, and focused on personal sectarian goals. Senator John McCain emphasized in 2007 that he was “concerned about Maliki and his strength.’’ Then-Senator Hillary Clinton at one point called for his removal in favor of a “less divisive and more unifying figure.’’

Nonetheless Maliki, through political dexterity, grittiness, US support, and some fortuitous events, has presided over a remarkable transition in Iraq. Under his leadership, the Iraqi national conversation moved from a singular focus on security and stability to a greater emphasis on reconciliation and reconstruction. The Shia-dominated Ministries of the Interior and Defense and a windfall from oil revenues haven’t hurt his standing in the government either.

This confidence and his seeming desire to pursue an agenda contrary to explicit American wishes, however, has at times left the United States displeased. In the spring of 2008, for example, Maliki undertook a major – and militarily inconclusive – armed assault on Basra, the second largest city in the country, while informing senior US officials only shortly before the assault. His government has remained reluctant to absorb the Sunni fighters, despite continued US pleas to incorporate them into the existing security forces.

What does a powerful Maliki mean for the United States? The continuing headache that this Iraqi prime minister gave to President Bush may indeed carry over into this administration, despite Maliki’s non-endorsing “endorsement’’ of Obama during the US presidential campaign. Nevertheless, given the drawdown of US troops in Iraq, having a strong man in Baghdad – whatever his ethnic or confessional background – is not the worst of all outcomes. Furthermore, given that much of Iraq under his tempestuous leadership has become more secure than a few years ago, it would give the United States the political cover to exit Iraq honorably.

Maliki’s power in this intervening time will most likely grow, and, absent any new shock to the system, will lead skeptics to question whether this Shia leader will indeed become the new Iraqi Saddam. In reality, Maliki remains constrained by a host of political realities: restive Kurds; antagonistic Sunnis; malicious Sadrites; meddlesome Iranians; the possibility of a nationwide backslide into sectarian warfare; and larger issues of institution-building in a fragile state. And given his background, there is little to indicate that absent a US presence he will behave in a more brutal fashion toward his adversaries.

We have yet to see a fedora-wearing Maliki wildly fire a rifle into the air during a grand military parade. But then again, he just might keep that hat and rifle out of public sight until the full departure of US troops.