What if Iran Rabbit Comes Out of Iraq Hat?

Apparently, the upcoming January 30 elections in Iraq are mostly about Iran with regards to the consequences. Iran insists on a social model of the "Islamic" revolution, the last revolution realized in the past century.

Iran's Islamic understanding is much more different than Turkish Islam. There is no imamate in the Sunni belief. It is not an issue of faith. The Shiites, however, by establishing a clergy, make the imamate an issue of faith. Imams are the only authorities who know everything about the past and the future and are able to solve the secret meanings of the Holy Koran.

Opposing them means opposing the Koran. Earning a divine in this way, the imam has no responsibility before the public and cannot be dismissed. The source of his authority is Allah via the lineage of the 12 imams. One who opposes an imam is considered as opposing God. The clergy emerges as a result of the demi-God-king cult that finds its place in the Shiite sect; however, according to Sunni political doctrine, "The head of state in Islam does not receive any of his authority from God and does not have any divine or authority. He is one of the members of the ummah, like the others. He is brought to the leadership position by the ummah or its representatives."

In Shiism, rejection of the imam's opinions results in excommunication, because "the orders of the imam are the orders of God, his prohibitions are also those of God. Obeying imams means obeying God and a revolt against them is a revolt against God." Imams do not only see [Angel] Gabriel, they also receive divine inspirations from God. The clergy has always been at the fore in Iran's political struggle. Their financial autonomy and large lands have been very beneficial in this fight. The state power had always been on the side of religion until religion laid claim to the state and government. [Ayatollah Rohullah] Khomeini had established this route in order to export his revolution and Shiite understanding. This was a Shiite circle covering the entire Middle East, beginning from Lebanon and passing through Palestine. Shiite militants destroyed the whole place during the Lebanese civil war. They occupied southern Lebanon and never withdrew. If the Shiites win in Iraq, Khomeini's Shiite circle will enlarge. If you ask the name of the administration in Basra and Nasarriyah, you receive the answer, Iran. The Iranian influence is excessive not only over Shiites but also over Kurds. A profound analysis of Fethullah Gülen, who had explicitly stated the points of the conceptual differences between Turkey and Iran in my interview published in 1997, is still valid today. ^[1]

Sixty percent of Iraq is made up of Shiites and 20 percent are Kurds, living in the north. Then, who will emerge [victorious] from the ballot box?

Iran's powerful influence even disturbs some Shiites. The Iraqi Islamic Revolution Party and the Cause Party are Iranian sympathizers. The Iranian influence is clearly observed in the election propaganda techniques. Portraits of the powerful ayatollahs are on the posters and some people are visiting homes, one by one, explaining that participation in the polls is a religious obligation. Imams preach in mosques that those who support their lists, will be doing good deeds, much more important than fasting and praying. As Jordanian King Abdullah said, increasing Iranian influence might shake all Arab-Sunni balances. Nobody is demanding a theocratic regime like the one in Tehran. The creator of the Arab Hezbollah movement, Iran, is also accused of making atomic bombs.

Condoleezza Rice listed Iran among the [six] outposts of tyranny. Everyone is also aware that Israel is the country mostly concerned about this potential threat. What is different here is that not only the United States and Israel are concerned about Iran, but Europe is concerned as well. Will Europe only be contented to remain in opposition or will it want to be included in the issue? Meanwhile, a rough ideology of the neo-cons is also to seek revenge.

If we go back to the elections, can putting a ballot box in the middle be a sign of democratization in Iraq, where the influence of religion is high and ethnic tribal structures harm each other? Does democracy emerge from the ballot box? If this is not an operation to find a rabbit in a hat, what then is the magic of the ballot box? It seems that the ballot box, which is constructed on the focal point of the different expectations, will crash into problematic majority rule/pluralism.

There are about one million Iranian immigrants in the United States, as many as the Americans themselves, in a country where the word Iran has become synonymous with terrorism. The Iraqi ballot box, constructed in the middle of the world, symbolizes an Armageddon-type election.

Tweet

Whatsapp