Author:
As Iran continues edging closer to developing nuclear weapons—a
major threat to the entire Mideast region, especially longstanding US ally
Israel—US President Obama has come to the aid of the Islamic Republic, by
citing an Islamic fatwa no less. In a video recording posted on the White
House’s website, Obama said, “Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has
issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President
Rouhani has said that Iran would never develop a nuclear weapon.”
This is the
same Rouhani who, after recently showcasing Iran’s newly developed
missiles, described his
nation’s diplomatic talks with the US as an active “jihad”: “Our negotiations
with the world powers are a source of national pride. Yesterday [during the
Iran-Iraq War], your brave generals stood against the enemy on the battlefield
and defended their country. Today, your diplomatic generals are defending [our
nation] in the field of diplomacy–this, too, is jihad.”
Other administration officials—such as Secretary of State John
Kerry and Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes—have previously referred
to the ayatollah’s reported fatwa in the context of the ongoing nuclear
negotiations with Iran.
The Obama administration’s citation of this fatwa is utterly
wrongheaded on many levels.
First, the
Islamic doctrine of taqiyya permits Muslims to deceive
non-Muslims. Islamic prophet Muhammad himself regularly lied to his infidel
enemies, often resulting in their murder (such as the case of Ka‘b ibn Ashraf). He also proclaimed that
lying was permissible in three contexts, one being war. Moreover, throughout
the centuries and due to historic circumstances (discussedhere), taqiyya became second nature to the
Shia—the sect currently ruling Iran.
Then there is the fact that Islamic law takes circumstance into
account. When Muhammad was weak and outnumbered in Mecca, he preached peace and
tolerance (hence why Meccan Suras appear peaceful); when he became strong in
Medina, he preached war and went on the offensive (hence why Medinan Suras are
violent and intolerant). This dichotomy—preach peace when weak, wage war when
strong—has been Islamic modus operandi for centuries.
Speaking of
fatwas, Dr. Yusuf Burhami, a prominent Islamic cleric in Egypt, recently said
that destroying churches in Egypt is permissible if not advisable—but not if
doing so prompts Western infidels to intervene and occupy Egypt, which they
could do “because the condition of Muslims in the current era is well known to
the nations of the world—they are weak.” Burhami further added that circumstance is everything, “just as the
prophet allowed the Jews to remain in Khaibar after he opened [conquered] it,
once Muslims grew in strength and number, [second caliph] Omar al-Khattab drove
them out according to the prophet’s command, ‘Drive out the Jews and Christians
from the Peninsula.’”
And who can forget Yasser Arafat’s reference to Muhammad’s
Hudaybiya pact? In 1994, soon after negotiating a peace treaty criticized
as conceding too much to Israel, Arafat addressed an assembly of Muslims and
said: “I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between
our Prophet Muhammad and the [infidel] Quraysh in Mecca.” In other words,
like Muhammad, Arafat gave his word only to annul it once his ranks became
strong enough to go on the offensive.
In short, it’s all very standard for Islamic leaders to say they
are pursuing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes while they are weaker than
their infidel foes—as Iran is today—but once they acquire nukes the jihad can
resume in earnest.
Then there
is the fact that Shia theology is rife with apocalyptic aspirations.
An August 2007 report compiled by the Congressional Research Service said:
“Ahmadinejad [previous president of Iran] believes his mission is to prepare
for the return of the 12th ‘Hidden’ Imam, whose return from occultation [i.e.,
“hiding”] would, according to Twelver Shi’ite doctrine, be accompanied by the
establishment of Islam as the global religion.”
Like other Iranians, Ahmadinejad cited the eschatological (and
canonical) hadith wherein Muhammad said: “The Hour [Judgment Day] will not come
until the Muslims fight the Jews and until the Jews hide behind the trees and
rocks and the trees and rocks will say, ‘O Muslim, O Servant of God! Here are
the Jews! Come and kill them!”
Indeed, during a recent speech, supreme leader Khamenei—whose
fatwa Obama is now citing—boasted about Iran’s uranium enrichment, even as his
military commanders shouted, “Allah Akbar. Khamenei is the leader. Death to the
enemies of the leadership. Death to America. Death to England. Death to
hypocrites. Death to Israel.”
Yet despite all this—despite the fact that Islamic doctrine
mandates lying to infidels; despite the fact that the Shia—Iran’s
leadership—have perfected taqiyya into an art; despite the fact that Islamic
law holds that Muslims should preach peace when weak, war when strong; despite
the fact that Iranian leadership openly boasts that its nuclear negotiations
are a “jihad” against the infidel; despite the fact that Iran has previously
been exposed developing uranium enrichments suitable for nuclear warheads—here
is Obama and his administration relying on the “word” of the ayatollah of Iran.
Raymond
Ibrahim is author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s
New War on Christians. A Mideast and Islam specialist, he is a
Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an associate fellow at
the Middle East Forum, and a Hoover Institution Media Fellow, 2013.
