What is an Islamic State

[Islamic Revival]

Introduction

It is a well acknowledged fact that Islam is a complete way of life which necessitates the existence of the State to implement the Shariah both at an individual and societal level comprehensively. Individuals can abide by some rules of Islam related to the prayer, fasting, and Hajj. The other rules of Islam that organize the various political, social, economic, and international relationships requires the existence of the State with the authority to organize the myriad of relationships that characterize the society and the resources to mobilize the Ummah towards propagating Islam.

Muhammad (saw) initiated a dynamic ideological and political struggle in Mecca in order to demolish the existing societal framework and reconstruct the social structure based on Islam. After thirteen years of struggle, he managed to establish the Islamic State in Medinah. From the first moment of its creation, that Islamic State implemented the Shariah comprehensively, conducted the affairs of the society solely according to Islam, and propagated Islam throughout the world for over thirteen centuries. Occasionally internal tensions fractured the integrity of the State, but such incidents were short-lived. Throughout its thirteen centuries of existence, the Khilafah continued as a single, indivisible entity that united all the Muslims under a single flag, a single constitution, and a single authority.

After the dissolution of the Khilafah in 1924, many states emerged and have claimed themselves to be Islamic ones. Saudi Arabia and Iran claim themselves to be Islamic states and have inscribed the Islamic Creed on their flags. Pakistan also proclaims itself as an Islamic republic, and, recently, Sudan has coined the term 'Islamic State' to describe its governmental structure. Even Iraq, during the Gulf war, inscribed the words "Allah hu Akbar" on its flag. Many other regimes and figureheads have employed terms such as "Islamic Democracy" and "Islamization" to add an Islamic tinge to their actions and try to convince the masses that they are structuring their agenda based on Islam.

Whenever a new state emerges and claims to be Islamic, many calls are made from the masses to support this new entity. A number of intellectuals and scholars even begin to validate such claims by amassing evidences and twisting facts to justify their preconceptions. Such individuals propagate their ideas and eventually facilitate the public opinion of the masses towards supporting such self-proclaimed Islamic regimes.

The lack of clarity and understanding of the structure of the Islamic State has left the Muslim Ummah in a state of confusion that the existing regimes have exploited. The regimes that preside over the Muslim lands - even those who have proclaimed themselves as Islamic - have no resemblance to the Islamic State modeled on the Shariah. Fully aware of the Ummah's feelings towards Islam, the regimes conjure such false claims and slogans to prey upon the Ummah's sentiments while, behind the facade, they continue to work on behalf of their Imperialist masters to undermine Islam. In order to verify the validity of these claims and prevent itself from rallying behind a facade or chasing a political mirage, the Muslim Ummah must establish a crystallized definition of the Islamic State and measure all such allegations objectively with the correct Islamic terminology.



What Is a State?

Most definitions characterize a state as an entity that implements a set of laws upon the people. A specific constitution that emanates from a unique doctrine gives rise to an ideological state that implements the doctrine, extracts its laws solely from that doctrine, and propagates the doctrine to other nations.

The Islamic State is an ideological state because its constitution is derived exclusively from the Islamic Aqeedah, and all the laws and systems that define its structure emanate from the Islamic Creed. The United States of America is also an ideological state that derives its laws and constitution from the doctrine of Democracy/Capitalism, and propagates this doctrine to other nations. States such as Congo, Madagascar, and the Philippines do not constitute ideological states because the laws and codes that define its social framework do not emanate from a particular doctrine but are imported from various sources and lumped together haphazardly.


What is an Islamic State?


The term Islamic State is composed of two words: "Islam" and "State." The Muslim Ummah has come to realize that the solution to their problems resides in creating the Islamic State, but much confusion remains in defining its parameters. Does a majority Muslim population establish an Islamic State, regardless of the laws, systems, and constitution imposed upon it? Does the partial implementation of some aspects of Islam or having the name Allah on the state flag suffice to consider a state as Islamic? Does the existence of Islamic movements in positions of authority constitute an Islamic State? Even if a state possesses all of these elements, it would not be considered the Islamic State. Because Islam is the Qur'an and the Sunnah, the Islamic state revolves around the Qur'an and the Sunnah and not around Muslims. The presence of a large Muslim population or Islamic movements does not produce the Islamic State.

Because Islam is composed of the Aqeedah (doctrine) and a collection of laws emanating from it, the Islamic State must derive its entire constitution from the Islamic Aqeedah. All of the systems, laws, and regulations must emanate solely from the Islamic Aqeedah and the sources of Shariah, and be substantiated by a Daleel (evidence) to verify such a law or article as derived from Islam, for a state to be considered Islamic. Any contradiction that exists between any law or article in the constitution and I slam will exclude such a state from the circle of Islam.

The Islamic Aqeedah would form the basis of every aspect of the social structure of the Islamic State. Islam would define the state's foreign policy and objectives. The questioning of the rulers and authorities, the formation of political parties, and the checks and balances that the state would establish to maintain its integrity, all would emanate exclusively from Islam. The Islamic State would not allow any concept or idea emanating from a source other than Islam, even if it had a similarity to Islam, to take root or establish itself within the social fabric.

In addition to establishing its structure solely upon Islam, the security of the Islamic State must rest in the hands of the Muslims and not with any other entity, state, or power. Because Saudi Arabia depends upon the United States for its security, the Saudi regime does not meet the criteria for the Islamic State. Complete authority over its internal affairs and its territory must reside exclusively with the State and the Muslim Ummah for such an entity to be the Islamic State. When Muhammad (saaw) asked a tribe for the authority (Nussrah), the chiefs of the tribe said, "We have an agreement with the Persian empire. They have authority in specific areas so if you want us to provide you with the Nussrah then this Nussrah will be restricted to that area only." The Prophet (saaw) told them explicitly, "No, I am looking for a person who has full authority, no person deserves to protect or support this deen without having the full authority." From this incident, the Shariah establishes full authority upon its territory as a condition for a state to be Islamic.


Are Today's Islamic States Really Islamic?



None of the states in the Muslim world today consider Islam as the sole source of their laws, constitution, and security. All of them implement various shades of man-made monarchies and republics tainted with an Islamic costume. Many argue that the structure of the government is irrelevant as long as the government implements Islam. But the Qur'anic ayah that says, "And rule them by what Allah revealed to you," invalidates such claims and establishes concretely that Islam mandates both the implementation of the rules and the specific structure that implements them. The Islamic State, in addition to implementing the rules of Islam, must establish its political structure according to the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Because none of the regimes resemble the model government defined by the Shariah in any respect, Islam invalidates all of these governments on this premise alone.

The foreign policy of the existing regimes exposes their true colors. All of the states in the Muslim world, including Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt are members in the UN. The UN is a Kufr organization because the UN charter recognizes and upholds the territorial boundaries that exist in the world as well as those that divide the Muslim Ummah. Islam prohibits any political division between the Muslims, yet such states willingly submit to the conditions of the UN and succumb their agenda and policies to the US foreign policy objectives. Omar al Basheer, the Sudanese President, said in a interview with a magazine called Palestine Al-Muslimah (January, 1992 Issue) regarding his relations with the US government, "We found that America is, politically speaking, the best state to deal with because they don't have the religious hatred that European states have," in spite of the atrocities and invasion of Muslim lands by the US during the Gulf War.

All that remains of the Shariah are some aspects of the Social and Punishment Systems, but even such vestiges are fraught with distortions. Local customs and traditions have mixed with the social fabric to produce a mutated social order full of stifling customs and double standards that turn many Muslims away from Islam, particularly women and youth. Even though some regimes implement the Islamic punishments, in the absence of the Islamic system, they do little in the way of performing their role of protecting the integrity of the society and only add to the oppression that the people endure. While the Saudi regime busily cuts the hands of the petty thieves in the streets, the Saud family is safe to continue robbing the wealth of the Ummah.

Some individuals, intellectuals, and groups, who champion such regimes as Islamic justify their claim on the notion of gradual implementation, claiming that Islam must proceed in its implementation in a gradual manner before reaching its climactic stage where Islam as a system is fully established. Such a notion completely contradicts Islam because the implementation of 20% of Islam, by simple mathematics, implies the presence of 80% of Kufr. And Allah (swt) condemns those who take Islam in pieces in the ayah when He (swt) says,

"Do you believe in a part of the Book and reject the rest? Then what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in the life of this world, and on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous torment."[Al-Baqarah: 85]

Any authority that claims itself as Islamic is bound by the Shariah of Allah (swt) to implement Islam completely.

The presence of a large Muslim population or a few laws from Islam does not denote the state as Islamic. During Numeri's era in Sudan, he claimed himself to be a ruler for an Islamic State while he was conspiring against the Muslim Ummah by helping the transportation of Jews from Ethiopia to Israel. After Numeri was removed, Dr. Turabi and his movement started denouncing the actions of Numeri. Now the current regime is claiming itself to be attached to the same movement! The Prophet (saw) indicated in a famous Hadith that the Believer cannot be fooled twice. The regimes presiding over the Muslim lands have fooled the Ummah too many times with slogans and false assertions that thrive upon the Ummah's unguided emotions.

The Muslims must avoid wishful thinking and establish their ideas and objectives upon concrete facts, submitting to the text of the Qur'an and the Sunnah and not to their emotions. Every Muslim desires to have the Islamic State, but this wish should not overshadow the vivid facts. The Muslim Ummah, and particularly those who are carrying the Islamic Dawah, should hold firmly to the Quran and Sunnah and consider Islam as the only reference for their thinking despite the whims and hopes of the people

[Islamic Revival]

Saudi Arabia: A State of Islam or a Kingdom Ruled with Kufr?

Every Muslim must know whether his/her Deen is implemented in any country. This is due to the fact that Muslims must pledge allegiance to the country that rules by the Deen of Allah (swt). In other words, that state would be the Khilafah State that is headed by the Khaleefah whom Islam obligated us to obey. Therefore, this presentation is not hypothetical, nor for pure academic reasons. In other words, the Muslims must know if king Fahd is the Khaleefah of the Muslims, and whether Saudi is the Islamic State. If we conclude that Saudi is the Islamic State, then the obligation of re-establishing the Islamic state is removed (and the Islamic movements are actually wasting their time working for a goal that is already achieved).

Muslims Perception

Many Muslims view Saudi Arabia as an Islamic state. This is due to the lack of having a criterion by which to determine whether a state is Islamic or not. It is also due to a lack of knowledge of the reality of the situation in that country because of the facade that is put up by the state. After all, every year Saudi Arabia donates millions of copies of the honourable Qur'an, Islamic books, and a lot of money to build Masajid, etc. all over the world. As a result, people believe it to be Islamic. Therefore, Muslims must know its reality.

The Criterion for a State to be Islamic

For a state to be Islamic, it must base its constitution, laws, structure, foreign relations, as well as solve its problems on the basis of the Islamic 'Aqeedah. If a state does not rule by Islamic laws or it imports rule from a non-Islamic basis in any sphere of its affairs, it is not Islamic i.e. it is a Kufr state. Now based on this criterion, let us examine Saudi Arabia.


Saudi Arabia and Man-Made Laws

Saudi Arabia rules by a mixture of laws, some of which are Islamic and some man-made. However, to maintain the Islamic perception, it refrains from calling them laws. Saudi Arabia uses specific terminology to differentiate between the Islamic laws and the man-made ones. In an Arabic book titled "The Constitutional Laws of the Arab Countries" under the subtitle "The Constitution of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," the author states, "The words 'law (anoon)' and 'Legislation (Tashree')' are only used in Saudi to refer to the rules taken from the Islamic Shari'ah ..... As for the man-made such as systems (Anthimah)' or 'instructions (Ta'leemaat)' or ' edicts (Awamir)' ......" In an Arabic book titled Al-Wajeez fi Tareekh Al-Qawneen (The Compact in the History of Cannons) by Dr. Mahmood Al-Maghribi, p.443, after mentioning that legislation in the past was Islamic and simple, he complements Saudi by saying, "this situation has changed after the rise of the Saudi State and the natural resources. This new situation required reforms and changes ... Due to these changes, there was a need for new laws. As a result, laws were formulated in the following areas; Laws in the basis of court systems, trade, penal code, labour, taxation, among others .." Regarding Trade laws, he stated "The trade laws, land and sea, which are known as 'The Trade System' are considered one of the most important Saudi trade laws. This law was issued in 1931 and is similar to the modern trade laws, be they Arab or European." With regard to the Islamic penal code, he said they are implemented (of course), "with some alterations required by the public interest." He also added, " Public interest also required making taxation revenue laws or the state..." The author is actually telling us that Saudi has been implementing non-Islamic laws in trade, "similar to the modern trade laws." He also tells us that Al-Saud have altered the Deen of Allah (swt) by changing some of his laws due to "public interest".

In actuality, there are many man-made laws which the author did not mention such as:

o The system of observing banks issued by the king's edict #M/5 in 1386 AH.

o The system of the Saudi Arab citizenship decided by the ministers Council resolution #4 on 25th January 1974 and approved by the king in his speech in High Council #8/5/8604 on 22nd February 1974 to put it in effect.

o The system of printed material and publication issued by the king's edict #M/17 in 13/4/1402 AH.

o The law of reviving the dead land used to be according to Islam, where if a person works an unused piece of land, that becomes his. This was the case until an edict was issued declaring the nullification of this Islamic law starting from 1987 onwards.

o The system of marrying non-Saudi woman.

o The general rule for taxes, approved by the king's edict #M/9, on 4/6/1395 AH.



Shar'i and Civil Courts


In Saudi Arabia, as in other states, in addition to Shari'ah courts, there are civil courts or courts that rule by man-made laws. As stated earlier, they do not call them civil courts, so as not to shock the Muslims there or embarrass their scholars, who are the biggest pillars of the state. In Saudi Arabia, man-made laws are introduced through legal forums councils and committees, such as Dewan of Mathalim (council of injustices). These forums are equal to civil courts in other countries. Scholars of Saudi Arabia refer to the civil courts in other countries as Kufr, but dare not say the same about these councils. These legal forums address issues that are part of Shari'ah, such as cases of Riba, forgery, bribes, etc. These councils are composed of Sheikhs and lawyers, from colleges such as the Sorbonne, who pass verdicts according to certain articles and edicts which are not Islamic.

For example, military courts are placed under a special Dewan called Dewan of Military Courts. In it, Saudi Arabia uses man-made laws called "the System of the Saudi Arab Army" issued on 11/11/1366 AH. This system is a combination of Shari'i and non-Shari'i laws which are exclusive to military personnel. An example of a Shar'i rule is that of Hirabah, killing anyone who tries to overthrow the regime. In reality, this law was introduced as a measure to deter Islamic activists and especially the army from attempting to remove the entity of Al-Saud and replace it with the Islamic one. As for the punishment for theft, which they claim is subject to Islam, it is not implemented. It is known that the Islamic punishment for theft is cutting off of the hand, whether the thief is a civilian, soldier or the Khaleefah himself. In "the System of the Saudi Arab Army" chapter 8 article no.12 it states, "The officers and the soldiers who steal something that belongs to other officers and soldiers or their moneys, and the item is consumable, then the thief is to pay its value, if consumed, and be imprisoned for a period ranging from a month and a half to three months..." Furthermore, if an officer commits theft and wants to repent and get punished according to article 20 and 22 from chapter 3 of the same system that places some crimes under the authority of the Shar'i courts and others under the "Council of trials".

We ask the scholars and the supporters of this British-made, American maintained state: Are the laws of Islam applicable to some people and inapplicable to others? What is the rule of Islam regarding legislating a punishment other than what Allah has revealed?

Saudi Arabia takes and gives Riba. Whoever takes a stroll near the Haram will see the British-Saudi Bank, American-Saudi Bank, Arab-National Bank, the Cairo-Saudi Bank etc. These banks with their Riba transactions are allowed to operate in accordance to Section B, article 1 of the Saudi law, issued by the king's edict no.M/5 in 1386 AH. It is well known that any case dealing with Riba and banks is automatically transferred to the monetary establishment where it is handled by specific committees. Cases of such nature do not go to Shar'i courts. Prior to this law, whenever a person borrowed money from a bank or an establishment and was late in paying it back, and got charged interest, he would go to a Shar'i court judge, who would nullify the interest. This led to a conflict. On the one land they needed the Shar'i courts, at least to keep up the farce, and at the same time they needed their banks. To resolve this conflict, Shar'i courts were prohibited from interfering in such cases under the "Specialisation" law (articles 20 and 21 from chapter 3 of the System of Saudi Arab Army).

Saudi and its Riba based relations with GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) Article 22 of the Unified Economic Agreement stated, "The member states coordinate their financial monetary banking and increase cooperation among monetary establishments and the central bank ..." Its clear that they deal with interest since banks and monetary establishments are based on Riba.


Saudi Arabia and the AMF (Arab Monetary Fund)


The Arab Monetary Fund, based in Abu Dhabi, is a huge Riba institution that was established by an agreement on 4/7/76 in Morocco. Saudi Arabia is the biggest share holder in it; it receives, as every one else in the Fund, Riba of an average of 3.2% on its shares.


Saudi Arabia and the IMF (International Monetary Fund)

It is worth mentioning that Saudi Arabia has the 6th largest share and power of rate. It had 3.5% of the total shares which enabled it to occupy a permanent seat in the executive board.

So we ask: How can a state that is involved in Riba as a set policy be Islamic? Maybe because it donates copies of Qur'an and the Saudi 'scholars' say so!!


Saudi Arabia and External Relations: The International Court of Justice


It is well known that Saudi Arabia is a member of the UN. According to article 92 of the UN constitution, the International court of Justice (ICJ) is the main Judicial branch of the UN. The ICJ performs its duties based on a system that is part of the UN constitution and must be respected and approved by every member state. Article 94 states "Every member of the UN is to submit to the ICJ in any case in which he is a part."

Is the International Law taken from the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His messenger (saw)? What is Saudi Arabia submitting to? The UN, which was created to counter Islam, or Islam?

Saudi is not merely a member of the UN. It is a pioneer in supporting the UN. Some even go to the extent of saying that it was one of the founding members. In a speech given by the then foreign minister, prince Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, in 1945 in the San Francisco conference, said: "...Let us abide by the principles which we wrote here on paper... and let this constitution be the basis on which we will build our new and better world."





Saudi Arabia and UNESCO

The UNESCO was formed in 1946. Saudi showed great interest in this organisation, lending it $4.6 million, interest free, and donating $50,00 in support of its projects. This organisation is designed to spread the Western ideas as well as distort Islam. For example, in the Encyclopedia on the History of the Human Race and its Scientific Development, issued by this organisation, in volume 3 chapter 10 it states;

1. Islam is a fabricated religion that is composed of Judaism, Christianity and Arabian Polytheism.

2. Qur'an is a book that has no tolerance of others.

3. The Prophet's traditions where made up by some people, a long time after the prophet, and attributed to him.

4. Muslim Jurists put down their jurisprudence based on the Roman, Persian and Church laws as well as the Old Testament..."

As a matter of fact, Tala Noor Attar, complemented Saudi Arabia in his book, "Saudi and the UN", saying that it donated to the UNESCO $17,040,000.

Is it that the government of Saudi Arabia is illiterate and never heard of what the UNESCO writes about concerning the Deen they are supposedly propagating, or is it that this is exactly what they are donating for?!

Saudi Arabia and the Arab League

Saudi Arabia is not only a member of this nationalistic organisation, but it is one of the founders. Article 8 of the Arab League Constitution states, "Every participating member of the League must respect the established ruling system of the other participating states in the League, it should consider it as a right of these states and obligate it self not to do any action that is aimed at changing their systems."

Assuming that Saudi Arabia is Islamic, is it permissible for it to recognise the Kufr, support it and promise not to change it? So the Baathi regime of Iraq and Alawyite in Syria should be respected!? And we have not mentioned the rule for nationalism which Saudi Arabia is propagating, for we think it is well known.


Excuses

Some claim that Saudi Arabia takes its stand without free will and under pressure. This may be said about a specific incident that occurred or a statement that it made, but no one can say this when the above mentioned set a basis of its policies since its establishment by the British. At any rate, King Fahd declares otherwise, "Every citizen should hold his head high, for his country in any way. We base our friendly relations with other countries based on our mutual benefits in a way that dose not permit any foreign country to have a hold in the Saudi Arab kingdom." [Thursday 8th of Safar 1405 AH]

Conclusion

It is clear, therefore, that Islam is not implemented in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, the work to resume the Islamic way of life via the re-establishment of the Khilafah is an obligation upon Muslims. We should show no loyalty and pledge no allegiance to this state nor to any existing state, since none of them are Islamic. The Islamic State is neither a kingship nor a republic. It is neither for the Saudi nor for the Arabs alone. It is the Islamic Khilafah State for the entire Muslim Ummah.