Post by aburidwan on Dec 4, 2005 22:02:44 GMT -5
Who is Zeyno Baran?
"Tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth". Was Zeyno Baran [Below], Director for International Security and Energy Programs at the Nixon Center, recalling the words of Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels when she described Hizb ut-Tahrir as a "conveyor belt for terrorists"?(1) Goebbels also advised his boss, "If you are going to lie, you should tell a big lie." That used to work, but time has a way of catching up to lies, as has been evident over the WMD lies created by powerful corporations and neo-conservatives to engineer regime change in Iraq.
Baran has been one of a handful of US analysts on the right wing of the political spectrum that has continuously propagated the tired claim that though Hizb ut-Tahrir is not a terrorist organisation, it is a "conveyor belt for terrorists". Despite the claim lacking any intellectual foundation, she continues to tirelessly do the bidding of the dictatorial regimes of Central Asia by playing down claims of human rights abuses and encouraging western governments to enact draconian measures against advocates of Islamic governance. While not busy boiling his political opponents alive, Uzbek President Islam Karimov must have found her recommendation that "Western countries should unite to ban HT altogether"(2) to be music to his ears.
Observers have questioned the objectivity with which Baran has approached her study of Hizb ut-Tahrir given her insistence on propagating the "conveyor belt" theory despite the lack of evidence to substantiate it and given the numerous factual inaccuracies that plague her writings. Who is Zeyno Baran? What motivates Baran to perpetuate these inaccuracies despite attempts to correct them? What relationships does she have with the dictatorial regimes of Central Asia that make her so keen to do their bidding?
Central Asian Dictatorships
It is somewhat surprising that Baran does little to conceal her close links to the Central Asian regimes, in particular the Uzbek regime.
By her own admission, in 2003, Baran "began second-track American efforts to engage with the Uzbekistani leadership to come up with better strategies to combat HT’s hold in Central Asia."(3) She says that she has "enjoyed the cooperation of the Uzbekistani government in its efforts, particularly that of former Uzbekistani Ambassador to the US Shavkat Khamrakulov and his successor, former Foreign Minister Abdulaziz Komilov."(4) She also says that the "assistance of current Foreign Minister Sadik Safaev has also been invaluable (who served in Washington from 1996 to 2000)."(5)
In the course of her work, Baran began to increase her influence by targeting the other governments of Central Asia. It became apparent that her interest in Hizb ut-Tahrir was more than academic or analytical; rather she had began to actively work with the repressive regimes of Central Asia to advise them on how they could hold on to power, faced with a mass movement desiring the return of the Islamic Caliphate. She states that "[Uzbek] Foreign Minister Sadik Safaev and Presidential Advisor Zukhriddin Khusnidinov were among several others who expressed great interest in trilateral cooperation between Washington, Ankara and Tashkent. Consequently, The Nixon Center organized a two-day workshop in Turkey in February 2004, entitled, “Deciphering and Combating Radical Islamist Ideology: Should the War against Terrorism be Extended to Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT)?”. It also invited Khusnidinov to participate and meet with Turkish Islamic specialists and national security experts. The workshop, which was organized with support from the Turkish think tank ASAM (Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies) and the Washington, DC-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, brought together a small group of scholars, policymakers and law enforcement officers from a wide range of countries that focus on HT. By then, Kyrgyzstani, Tajikistani and Kazakhstani policymakers had begun to concentrate on the threat posed by the group, and all three presidents sent their representatives. At this workshop, Central Asian government representatives were able to learn from other countries’ experiences in dealing with HT, including about the activities of the Turkish Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet)"(6)
Given her close links to the regimes of Central Asia it is therefore not surprising that in her writings she plays down the human rights abuses that have become par for the course. She states that, "The single-issue advocacy of the human rights groups, aided and abetted by HT itself, has only made matters worse, especially in Uzbekistan. Certainly there are serious human-rights issues in Uzbekistan, particularly regarding torture, but the anti-Uzbekistani sentiment currently prevalent in the West is counterproductive."(7)
So in her view the raising of awareness of the human rights situation in Uzbekistan that has resulted in international awareness about the repression of the Karimov regime has been "counterproductive". Despite her desire to "move towards building a global civilization based on shared values of freedom, justice and human dignity"(8) , in testimony to the Committee on International Relations she advises that, "religious freedom as understood in the US should not be directly applied to Uzbekistan".(9)
In December 2004 she noted that the, "Uzbekistani authorities began to correct past mistakes".(10) Her optimistic assessment gives little solace to the loved ones of the thousands massacred in cold blood at the hands of Karimov's security forces in Andijan less than six months later in May 2005. With respect to the Andijan massacre, Human Rights Watch notes that, "Separate investigations conducted by Human Rights Watch, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found that Uzbek government forces were responsible for the majority of civilian deaths. Contrary to accounts provided by the Uzbek government, these reports also found that the large-scale demonstration that took place in Andijan on May 13 was not related to Islamic extremism, but to the expression of people’s grievances regarding the economy, poverty, and abuses of the judicial system."(11) Not surprisingly, Baran was uncharacteristically quiet about the Andijan massacre and its perpetrators.
Given her close links to the regimes of Central Asia it is no surprise that while making much of her desire to fight the "war of ideas", she encourages the governments of Central Asia and the West to counter Hizb ut-Tahrir and any form of Islamic political expression with censorship, banning and repression.
US Energy Interests
The Caspian region today is an area of competing interests for various countries - the US, Russia, China, Japan and India - for it is a promising oil and gas region with resources exceeding those of the North Sea. Under the bottom of the Caspian Sea, which is the largest lake in the world, there are 4% of the world gas and oil reserves.
Most of the major oil companies, Chevron Texaco, Exxon Mobil, British Petroleum and Halliburton among them, have invested large sums in the region. Over the past five years the US investments in Central Asia and the Caspian region have increased from insignificant sums to $30 billion.
Given Baran's role as Director for International Security and Energy Programs at the Nixon Center it is no surprise that she pays close attention to the fate of the region's energy resources.
In her testimony in September 2005 to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Baran hinted at the interests at stake in Central Asia; "With its significant oil and gas reserves, especially in Russia and Kazakhstan, the Eurasian region is vitally important to the US strategic effort to diversify energy supplies away from sources in the Middle East. The US has a clear need to ensure that these supplies reach world markets cheaply and safely; however, it has an equal need to ensure internal reforms in the countries of the region. If it fails to do so, its effort to end its energy dependence on oil and gas from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf will only result in the creation of a “second Middle East,” with equally damaging consequences for US interests." (12)
Russia and China have been making strong efforts to counterbalance the growing US influence in the region. As Baran states in her testimony, "The Russian-Chinese energy cooperation is extremely significant in light of the developments in and around Central Asia over the last several years. While it is difficult to fathom a long-lasting Russian-Chinese strategic partnership, at least for now both seem to have decided to cooperate to reduce the U.S. influence and presence in Central Asia."(13)
The Eurasia Project at the Nixon Center, headed by Baran, looks to guide American policy in the region in order to advance US "security and energy interests in the region".(14)
It is therefore to be expected that Baran has close links with the US administration and its policies for the region. In writing the Nixon Center monograph "Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's political insurgency", Baran acknowledges the "tremendous intellectual and personal support"(15) given to her by Matthew Bryza. What she doesn't say is that Matthew Bryza is US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia. Not surprisingly, Bryza also has his eyes on the region's energy resources: "We are not ashamed to say that the US has strategic interests in the region,"(16) he said. He went on to point out that these interests were not just military, but that America also had an interest in Kazakh fossil fuels. Bryza worked closely on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline in his previous position as Senior Advisor to the Office of the Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State on Caspian Basin Energy Diplomacy.
Uzbek Government Sponsored Islam
Baran understands that the return of the Caliphate will prioritise urgently the plight of the poor, rather than ruling elites, and will result in the end of disproportionate corporate influence in political decision making. Given her proximity to the regimes of Central Asia and her close links with the US administration, including energy interests, she is keen to counter the Islamic political resurgence that is taking place across Central Asia and the Muslim world. While keen to support a "secular jihad" to impose western values on the Muslim world, Baran realises that the masses have an intimate attachment to Islam that cannot be simply overlooked.
Closer scrutiny of Baran's views towards Islam show that she is not averse to the Uzbek government approved version of Islam and in fact actively promotes it. There is incontrovertible evidence of an extremely close relationship between the Uzbek government and the American based Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA) that is chaired by Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani.
On September 8, 2000 after the United Nations' Millennium Summit for world leaders, President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan met with Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Adil al-Haqqani, world leader of the Naqshbandi-Haqqani Sufi Order, and Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani [picture below]. In a private meeting in New York, President Karimov and Uzbek Ambassador Sadik Safaev met with ISCA Chair, Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Adil, ISCA Chairman Sheikh Hisham Kabbani and ISCA General Secretary, Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi, to discuss avenues of cooperation for future educational and religious projects. (17)
The sheikhs discussed with the Uzbek delegation issues of human rights, and set forth an agenda opposing all forms of 'radicalism', whether ideological, cultural or political. Committed to combating abuses of the faith, an agreement was made to coordinate and cooperate on future education endeavours such as co-sponsoring joint conferences, printing and distributing traditional, scholarly literature, and facilitating meetings with other world leaders.
Demonstrating his appreciation, the meeting concluded with the presentation by President Karimov of ceremonial Bukhari robes, traditionally worn by Naqshbandi Sheikhs and scholars of the region, to the two sheikhs, and a gift to Dr. Mirahmadi.
On November 30th 1999 the National Press Club held a meeting on "The Rise of Radicalism in Central Asia". Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi, Executive Director of ISCA, Abdur-Rashid Qari Bakhromov, the government appointed Mufti of Uzbekistan and Sadik Safaev, Ambassador of the Republic Uzbekistan to the US made speeches there. (18)
Igor Rotar, the Forum 18 News Service Correspondent in Central Asia, has noted that, "the [Uzbek] government uses Sufism in propaganda outside Uzbekistan, especially in the USA, to claim that the state supports Sufism as an alternative to Islamic fundamentalism."(19) Rotar notes that, "the Uzbek authorities' claimed support for Sufism is far from genuine…Naqshbandi followers, who preferred not to be named, told Forum 18 that the National Security Service (NSS) secret police and the ordinary police keep an eye on these meetings, and warn believers that religious meetings are not allowed in private apartments…It appears that Uzbek state support for Sufism is more for propaganda purposes in the USA than anything else. The Uzbek government supports close ties with the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA), which embraces Naqshbandi followers in the USA, and plays up its supposed popularity in the Islamic world. Although the number of ISCA members is relatively small, Uzbek propaganda represents ISCA as being one of the most influential Muslim organisations in the United States."(20)
The Uzbek government invited ISCA representatives to act as observers at the presidential elections in January 2000, which ISCA described as Uzbekistan's "second democratic elections since its emancipation from communism".(21) In sharp contrast, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) refused to send observers "because of the absence of a credible choice available to voters".(22) President Karimov's token rival, Abdulhafiz Dzhalalov, admitted that he himself had voted for Karimov.
In the light of this incontrovertible evidence there can be little doubt about the close relationship of ISCA and the Uzbek regime. However, what is more surprising is that Zeyno Baran has enjoyed a very close relationship with the ISCA. In particular she has had a close relationship with Hedieh Mirahmadi, Executive Director of ISCA, a "former top aide" to Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani and a former senior adviser to the US embassy in Kabul. In writing the Nixon Center monograph "Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's political insurgency", Baran acknowledges the "tremendous intellectual and personal support" given to her by Mirahmadi. (23)
Mirahmadi [above] is an apologist for one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. About a government that bans all dissent, represses religion and boils dissidents alive, Ms. Mirahmadi had this to say: "We were all grateful to experience for ourselves the spectacular growth of this new republic. We sincerely believe Uzbekistan will be a formidable contributor to Islamic tradition and culture for centuries to come. Their great history and scholarship will preserve the traditional Islamic teachings of our ancestors and deserves the support and acknowledgement of the American Muslim community."(24) These were her words of praise for a viciously repressive government, uttered at the conclusion of her trip to Uzbekistan, where Mirahmadi was feted by the ruthless Uzbek dictator.
Mirahmadi gives this account of Uzbekistan's Presidential election in January 2000 which she observed, "In Uzbekistan, the people were allocated one day to cast their votes. Polling booths were set up in every district of the republic and were located in easily accessible community centers. The name and address of every eligible voter was listed on pre-printed lists and each name was crossed off after casting his vote, to avoid any multiplicative voting. Voters were allowed to cast their ballots in private curtained booths and placed the ballots in sealed voting boxes. No pressure was ever made on the people to place votes, nor were there any repercussions for citizens who chose not to vote." (25)
Compare Mirahmadi's account to that of Human Rights Watch; "Citizens of Uzbekistan were once again denied their right to endeavour to participate in the political system and to change their government peacefully. Parliamentary elections held in December 1999 and presidential elections in January 2000 were neither free nor fair. No genuine opposition political parties were registered, there was no opportunity to air views via the mass media, and no possibility to exercise freedom of assembly or association…In January 2000, Soviet-style presidential elections made a mockery of the democratic system. President Karimov claimed support from 91.9 percent of the electorate, which included a vote from his nominal opponent in the race. The US government declared the election "neither free nor fair" and said it "offered Uzbekistan's voters no true choice.""(26)
Laughably, Mirahmadi, writes, "It is apparent that the criticism of the Uzbek electoral process by the Western nations is not a sentiment that is shared by the Uzbek people themselves, as demonstrated by their commitment to voting for him." (27)
She also wrote that, "It was emotionally moving to see what reverence the Uzbek people have for their President, fundamentally the result of his revival of Islam."(28)
More recently, Mirahmadi writes in National Review Online that, "Traditionally, Sufis have been more interested in their personal relationship with God than with politics, keeping a low profile and maintaining their religious traditions."(29)
With this understanding of Sufism, it is no surprise that the ISCA have endeared themselves to Karimov and the likes of Baran – both would like to see a Muslim population that does not concern itself with the excesses of the ruling elite and their apologists in western capitals.
As further evidence of Baran's close relationship with ISCA she invited Mateen Siddiqui, the vice chairman of ISCA, to speak about "The Doctrine of Hizb ut-Tahrir" at a September 2004 conference at the Nixon Center.(30) His presentation was plagued with inaccuracies about Hizb ut-Tahrir and attempted to portray most of Hizb ut-Tahrir's thinking as beyond the pale; he did not reflect on the fact that most Muslim organisations in the USA, of all schools of thought, have strongly criticised ISCA for its close relationship with the US government and its strange theological positions, including outlandish claims that the late Princess Diana, Prince Charles and Hillary Clinton have all embraced Islam at the hands of the leaders of the ISCA.
Conclusion
Michael Bugeja, who teaches journalism at Iowa State University, says, "Objectivity is seeing the world as it is, not how you wish it were."(31) Baran would do better taking his advice rather than seemingly following the advice of the Nazi propaganda chief Goebbels.
Baran's writings on the subject of Hizb ut-Tahrir, Uzbekistan and indeed Islam in general should be viewed with the same cynicism and scepticism that one would view a Scientologist "objectively reviewing" a critique of the science fiction scribblings of L. Ron Hubbard. No serious media organisation or commentator can view Baran as a credible expert on any topic related to Islam because Baran's principle objective seems not to inform or convey the truth but rather to push and promote the agenda of the tyrannical regimes, energy corporations and Uzbek government sponsored Islamists with which she shares such an intimate relationship.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zeyno Baran, The Road from Tashkent to Taliban, April 2 2004, National Review Online, www.nationalreview.com/comment/baran200404020933.asp
Zeyno Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, 2004), p. 134.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 106.
Ibid., p. 83.
Ibid., Acknowledgements.
Zeyno Baran, “Uzbekistan: The Key to Success in Central Asia?”, Testimony to House Committee on International Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, June 15 2004)
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, p. 96
Human Rights Watch, "Burying the Truth: Uzbekistan Rewrites the Story of the Andijan Massacre", September 2005, hrw.org/reports/2005/uzbekistan0905/index.htm
Zeyno Baran, "Energy Supplies in Eurasia and Implications for US Energy Security", Testimony to The United States Foreign Relations Committee Subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, September 27 2005)
Ibid.
Eurasia Project, www.nixoncenter.org/Baran/Eurasia%20Project.htm
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, Acknowledgements
Leigh Baldwin, "Analysis: Kazakhstan, U.S. new best friend", www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20051025-051008-4361r
Uzbek President Islam Karimov honors Shaykh Muhammad Nazim & Shaykh Hisham Kabbani, www.naqshbandi.org/events/us2000/uzbek_pres/default.htm [archived at ]www.archive.org]
The Record, National Press Club,http://www.press.org/abouttheclub/record/1999record/record-11-25-99.html
Igor Rotar, "Uzbekistan: Sufism used for Uzbek propaganda in the USA", Forum 18 News Service, 13 May 2004, www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=319
Ibid.
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan", jahon.mfa.uz/Z_P_News/muslim.html [archived at ]www.archive.org]
Rotar, "Uzbekistan: Sufism used for Uzbek propaganda in the USA"
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, Acknowledgements
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan"
Ibid.
Human Rights Watch, World Report 2001, www.hrw.org/wr2k1/europe/uzbekistan.html
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan"
Ibid.
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "Sunni Disposition", May 7 2004, National Review Online, www.nationalreview.com/comment/mirahmadi200405070942.asp
Mateen Siddiqui, “The Doctrine of Hizb ut-Tahrir”, in The Challenge of Hizb ut-Tahrir: Deciphering and Combating Radical Islamist Ideology, ed. Zeyno Baran (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, 2004), p. 1.
Michael Bugeja, quoted in Cunningham, Re-thinking Objectivity, www.cjr.org/issues/2003/4/objective-cunningham.asp
"Tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth". Was Zeyno Baran [Below], Director for International Security and Energy Programs at the Nixon Center, recalling the words of Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels when she described Hizb ut-Tahrir as a "conveyor belt for terrorists"?(1) Goebbels also advised his boss, "If you are going to lie, you should tell a big lie." That used to work, but time has a way of catching up to lies, as has been evident over the WMD lies created by powerful corporations and neo-conservatives to engineer regime change in Iraq.
Baran has been one of a handful of US analysts on the right wing of the political spectrum that has continuously propagated the tired claim that though Hizb ut-Tahrir is not a terrorist organisation, it is a "conveyor belt for terrorists". Despite the claim lacking any intellectual foundation, she continues to tirelessly do the bidding of the dictatorial regimes of Central Asia by playing down claims of human rights abuses and encouraging western governments to enact draconian measures against advocates of Islamic governance. While not busy boiling his political opponents alive, Uzbek President Islam Karimov must have found her recommendation that "Western countries should unite to ban HT altogether"(2) to be music to his ears.
Observers have questioned the objectivity with which Baran has approached her study of Hizb ut-Tahrir given her insistence on propagating the "conveyor belt" theory despite the lack of evidence to substantiate it and given the numerous factual inaccuracies that plague her writings. Who is Zeyno Baran? What motivates Baran to perpetuate these inaccuracies despite attempts to correct them? What relationships does she have with the dictatorial regimes of Central Asia that make her so keen to do their bidding?
Central Asian Dictatorships
It is somewhat surprising that Baran does little to conceal her close links to the Central Asian regimes, in particular the Uzbek regime.
By her own admission, in 2003, Baran "began second-track American efforts to engage with the Uzbekistani leadership to come up with better strategies to combat HT’s hold in Central Asia."(3) She says that she has "enjoyed the cooperation of the Uzbekistani government in its efforts, particularly that of former Uzbekistani Ambassador to the US Shavkat Khamrakulov and his successor, former Foreign Minister Abdulaziz Komilov."(4) She also says that the "assistance of current Foreign Minister Sadik Safaev has also been invaluable (who served in Washington from 1996 to 2000)."(5)
In the course of her work, Baran began to increase her influence by targeting the other governments of Central Asia. It became apparent that her interest in Hizb ut-Tahrir was more than academic or analytical; rather she had began to actively work with the repressive regimes of Central Asia to advise them on how they could hold on to power, faced with a mass movement desiring the return of the Islamic Caliphate. She states that "[Uzbek] Foreign Minister Sadik Safaev and Presidential Advisor Zukhriddin Khusnidinov were among several others who expressed great interest in trilateral cooperation between Washington, Ankara and Tashkent. Consequently, The Nixon Center organized a two-day workshop in Turkey in February 2004, entitled, “Deciphering and Combating Radical Islamist Ideology: Should the War against Terrorism be Extended to Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT)?”. It also invited Khusnidinov to participate and meet with Turkish Islamic specialists and national security experts. The workshop, which was organized with support from the Turkish think tank ASAM (Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies) and the Washington, DC-based Ethics and Public Policy Center, brought together a small group of scholars, policymakers and law enforcement officers from a wide range of countries that focus on HT. By then, Kyrgyzstani, Tajikistani and Kazakhstani policymakers had begun to concentrate on the threat posed by the group, and all three presidents sent their representatives. At this workshop, Central Asian government representatives were able to learn from other countries’ experiences in dealing with HT, including about the activities of the Turkish Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet)"(6)
Given her close links to the regimes of Central Asia it is therefore not surprising that in her writings she plays down the human rights abuses that have become par for the course. She states that, "The single-issue advocacy of the human rights groups, aided and abetted by HT itself, has only made matters worse, especially in Uzbekistan. Certainly there are serious human-rights issues in Uzbekistan, particularly regarding torture, but the anti-Uzbekistani sentiment currently prevalent in the West is counterproductive."(7)
So in her view the raising of awareness of the human rights situation in Uzbekistan that has resulted in international awareness about the repression of the Karimov regime has been "counterproductive". Despite her desire to "move towards building a global civilization based on shared values of freedom, justice and human dignity"(8) , in testimony to the Committee on International Relations she advises that, "religious freedom as understood in the US should not be directly applied to Uzbekistan".(9)
In December 2004 she noted that the, "Uzbekistani authorities began to correct past mistakes".(10) Her optimistic assessment gives little solace to the loved ones of the thousands massacred in cold blood at the hands of Karimov's security forces in Andijan less than six months later in May 2005. With respect to the Andijan massacre, Human Rights Watch notes that, "Separate investigations conducted by Human Rights Watch, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) found that Uzbek government forces were responsible for the majority of civilian deaths. Contrary to accounts provided by the Uzbek government, these reports also found that the large-scale demonstration that took place in Andijan on May 13 was not related to Islamic extremism, but to the expression of people’s grievances regarding the economy, poverty, and abuses of the judicial system."(11) Not surprisingly, Baran was uncharacteristically quiet about the Andijan massacre and its perpetrators.
Given her close links to the regimes of Central Asia it is no surprise that while making much of her desire to fight the "war of ideas", she encourages the governments of Central Asia and the West to counter Hizb ut-Tahrir and any form of Islamic political expression with censorship, banning and repression.
US Energy Interests
The Caspian region today is an area of competing interests for various countries - the US, Russia, China, Japan and India - for it is a promising oil and gas region with resources exceeding those of the North Sea. Under the bottom of the Caspian Sea, which is the largest lake in the world, there are 4% of the world gas and oil reserves.
Most of the major oil companies, Chevron Texaco, Exxon Mobil, British Petroleum and Halliburton among them, have invested large sums in the region. Over the past five years the US investments in Central Asia and the Caspian region have increased from insignificant sums to $30 billion.
Given Baran's role as Director for International Security and Energy Programs at the Nixon Center it is no surprise that she pays close attention to the fate of the region's energy resources.
In her testimony in September 2005 to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Baran hinted at the interests at stake in Central Asia; "With its significant oil and gas reserves, especially in Russia and Kazakhstan, the Eurasian region is vitally important to the US strategic effort to diversify energy supplies away from sources in the Middle East. The US has a clear need to ensure that these supplies reach world markets cheaply and safely; however, it has an equal need to ensure internal reforms in the countries of the region. If it fails to do so, its effort to end its energy dependence on oil and gas from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf will only result in the creation of a “second Middle East,” with equally damaging consequences for US interests." (12)
Russia and China have been making strong efforts to counterbalance the growing US influence in the region. As Baran states in her testimony, "The Russian-Chinese energy cooperation is extremely significant in light of the developments in and around Central Asia over the last several years. While it is difficult to fathom a long-lasting Russian-Chinese strategic partnership, at least for now both seem to have decided to cooperate to reduce the U.S. influence and presence in Central Asia."(13)
The Eurasia Project at the Nixon Center, headed by Baran, looks to guide American policy in the region in order to advance US "security and energy interests in the region".(14)
It is therefore to be expected that Baran has close links with the US administration and its policies for the region. In writing the Nixon Center monograph "Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's political insurgency", Baran acknowledges the "tremendous intellectual and personal support"(15) given to her by Matthew Bryza. What she doesn't say is that Matthew Bryza is US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia. Not surprisingly, Bryza also has his eyes on the region's energy resources: "We are not ashamed to say that the US has strategic interests in the region,"(16) he said. He went on to point out that these interests were not just military, but that America also had an interest in Kazakh fossil fuels. Bryza worked closely on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline in his previous position as Senior Advisor to the Office of the Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State on Caspian Basin Energy Diplomacy.
Uzbek Government Sponsored Islam
Baran understands that the return of the Caliphate will prioritise urgently the plight of the poor, rather than ruling elites, and will result in the end of disproportionate corporate influence in political decision making. Given her proximity to the regimes of Central Asia and her close links with the US administration, including energy interests, she is keen to counter the Islamic political resurgence that is taking place across Central Asia and the Muslim world. While keen to support a "secular jihad" to impose western values on the Muslim world, Baran realises that the masses have an intimate attachment to Islam that cannot be simply overlooked.
Closer scrutiny of Baran's views towards Islam show that she is not averse to the Uzbek government approved version of Islam and in fact actively promotes it. There is incontrovertible evidence of an extremely close relationship between the Uzbek government and the American based Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA) that is chaired by Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani.
On September 8, 2000 after the United Nations' Millennium Summit for world leaders, President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan met with Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Adil al-Haqqani, world leader of the Naqshbandi-Haqqani Sufi Order, and Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani [picture below]. In a private meeting in New York, President Karimov and Uzbek Ambassador Sadik Safaev met with ISCA Chair, Sheikh Muhammad Nazim Adil, ISCA Chairman Sheikh Hisham Kabbani and ISCA General Secretary, Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi, to discuss avenues of cooperation for future educational and religious projects. (17)
The sheikhs discussed with the Uzbek delegation issues of human rights, and set forth an agenda opposing all forms of 'radicalism', whether ideological, cultural or political. Committed to combating abuses of the faith, an agreement was made to coordinate and cooperate on future education endeavours such as co-sponsoring joint conferences, printing and distributing traditional, scholarly literature, and facilitating meetings with other world leaders.
Demonstrating his appreciation, the meeting concluded with the presentation by President Karimov of ceremonial Bukhari robes, traditionally worn by Naqshbandi Sheikhs and scholars of the region, to the two sheikhs, and a gift to Dr. Mirahmadi.
On November 30th 1999 the National Press Club held a meeting on "The Rise of Radicalism in Central Asia". Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi, Executive Director of ISCA, Abdur-Rashid Qari Bakhromov, the government appointed Mufti of Uzbekistan and Sadik Safaev, Ambassador of the Republic Uzbekistan to the US made speeches there. (18)
Igor Rotar, the Forum 18 News Service Correspondent in Central Asia, has noted that, "the [Uzbek] government uses Sufism in propaganda outside Uzbekistan, especially in the USA, to claim that the state supports Sufism as an alternative to Islamic fundamentalism."(19) Rotar notes that, "the Uzbek authorities' claimed support for Sufism is far from genuine…Naqshbandi followers, who preferred not to be named, told Forum 18 that the National Security Service (NSS) secret police and the ordinary police keep an eye on these meetings, and warn believers that religious meetings are not allowed in private apartments…It appears that Uzbek state support for Sufism is more for propaganda purposes in the USA than anything else. The Uzbek government supports close ties with the Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA), which embraces Naqshbandi followers in the USA, and plays up its supposed popularity in the Islamic world. Although the number of ISCA members is relatively small, Uzbek propaganda represents ISCA as being one of the most influential Muslim organisations in the United States."(20)
The Uzbek government invited ISCA representatives to act as observers at the presidential elections in January 2000, which ISCA described as Uzbekistan's "second democratic elections since its emancipation from communism".(21) In sharp contrast, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) refused to send observers "because of the absence of a credible choice available to voters".(22) President Karimov's token rival, Abdulhafiz Dzhalalov, admitted that he himself had voted for Karimov.
In the light of this incontrovertible evidence there can be little doubt about the close relationship of ISCA and the Uzbek regime. However, what is more surprising is that Zeyno Baran has enjoyed a very close relationship with the ISCA. In particular she has had a close relationship with Hedieh Mirahmadi, Executive Director of ISCA, a "former top aide" to Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani and a former senior adviser to the US embassy in Kabul. In writing the Nixon Center monograph "Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's political insurgency", Baran acknowledges the "tremendous intellectual and personal support" given to her by Mirahmadi. (23)
Mirahmadi [above] is an apologist for one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. About a government that bans all dissent, represses religion and boils dissidents alive, Ms. Mirahmadi had this to say: "We were all grateful to experience for ourselves the spectacular growth of this new republic. We sincerely believe Uzbekistan will be a formidable contributor to Islamic tradition and culture for centuries to come. Their great history and scholarship will preserve the traditional Islamic teachings of our ancestors and deserves the support and acknowledgement of the American Muslim community."(24) These were her words of praise for a viciously repressive government, uttered at the conclusion of her trip to Uzbekistan, where Mirahmadi was feted by the ruthless Uzbek dictator.
Mirahmadi gives this account of Uzbekistan's Presidential election in January 2000 which she observed, "In Uzbekistan, the people were allocated one day to cast their votes. Polling booths were set up in every district of the republic and were located in easily accessible community centers. The name and address of every eligible voter was listed on pre-printed lists and each name was crossed off after casting his vote, to avoid any multiplicative voting. Voters were allowed to cast their ballots in private curtained booths and placed the ballots in sealed voting boxes. No pressure was ever made on the people to place votes, nor were there any repercussions for citizens who chose not to vote." (25)
Compare Mirahmadi's account to that of Human Rights Watch; "Citizens of Uzbekistan were once again denied their right to endeavour to participate in the political system and to change their government peacefully. Parliamentary elections held in December 1999 and presidential elections in January 2000 were neither free nor fair. No genuine opposition political parties were registered, there was no opportunity to air views via the mass media, and no possibility to exercise freedom of assembly or association…In January 2000, Soviet-style presidential elections made a mockery of the democratic system. President Karimov claimed support from 91.9 percent of the electorate, which included a vote from his nominal opponent in the race. The US government declared the election "neither free nor fair" and said it "offered Uzbekistan's voters no true choice.""(26)
Laughably, Mirahmadi, writes, "It is apparent that the criticism of the Uzbek electoral process by the Western nations is not a sentiment that is shared by the Uzbek people themselves, as demonstrated by their commitment to voting for him." (27)
She also wrote that, "It was emotionally moving to see what reverence the Uzbek people have for their President, fundamentally the result of his revival of Islam."(28)
More recently, Mirahmadi writes in National Review Online that, "Traditionally, Sufis have been more interested in their personal relationship with God than with politics, keeping a low profile and maintaining their religious traditions."(29)
With this understanding of Sufism, it is no surprise that the ISCA have endeared themselves to Karimov and the likes of Baran – both would like to see a Muslim population that does not concern itself with the excesses of the ruling elite and their apologists in western capitals.
As further evidence of Baran's close relationship with ISCA she invited Mateen Siddiqui, the vice chairman of ISCA, to speak about "The Doctrine of Hizb ut-Tahrir" at a September 2004 conference at the Nixon Center.(30) His presentation was plagued with inaccuracies about Hizb ut-Tahrir and attempted to portray most of Hizb ut-Tahrir's thinking as beyond the pale; he did not reflect on the fact that most Muslim organisations in the USA, of all schools of thought, have strongly criticised ISCA for its close relationship with the US government and its strange theological positions, including outlandish claims that the late Princess Diana, Prince Charles and Hillary Clinton have all embraced Islam at the hands of the leaders of the ISCA.
Conclusion
Michael Bugeja, who teaches journalism at Iowa State University, says, "Objectivity is seeing the world as it is, not how you wish it were."(31) Baran would do better taking his advice rather than seemingly following the advice of the Nazi propaganda chief Goebbels.
Baran's writings on the subject of Hizb ut-Tahrir, Uzbekistan and indeed Islam in general should be viewed with the same cynicism and scepticism that one would view a Scientologist "objectively reviewing" a critique of the science fiction scribblings of L. Ron Hubbard. No serious media organisation or commentator can view Baran as a credible expert on any topic related to Islam because Baran's principle objective seems not to inform or convey the truth but rather to push and promote the agenda of the tyrannical regimes, energy corporations and Uzbek government sponsored Islamists with which she shares such an intimate relationship.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zeyno Baran, The Road from Tashkent to Taliban, April 2 2004, National Review Online, www.nationalreview.com/comment/baran200404020933.asp
Zeyno Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, 2004), p. 134.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 105.
Ibid., p. 106.
Ibid., p. 83.
Ibid., Acknowledgements.
Zeyno Baran, “Uzbekistan: The Key to Success in Central Asia?”, Testimony to House Committee on International Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, June 15 2004)
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, p. 96
Human Rights Watch, "Burying the Truth: Uzbekistan Rewrites the Story of the Andijan Massacre", September 2005, hrw.org/reports/2005/uzbekistan0905/index.htm
Zeyno Baran, "Energy Supplies in Eurasia and Implications for US Energy Security", Testimony to The United States Foreign Relations Committee Subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, September 27 2005)
Ibid.
Eurasia Project, www.nixoncenter.org/Baran/Eurasia%20Project.htm
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, Acknowledgements
Leigh Baldwin, "Analysis: Kazakhstan, U.S. new best friend", www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20051025-051008-4361r
Uzbek President Islam Karimov honors Shaykh Muhammad Nazim & Shaykh Hisham Kabbani, www.naqshbandi.org/events/us2000/uzbek_pres/default.htm [archived at ]www.archive.org]
The Record, National Press Club,http://www.press.org/abouttheclub/record/1999record/record-11-25-99.html
Igor Rotar, "Uzbekistan: Sufism used for Uzbek propaganda in the USA", Forum 18 News Service, 13 May 2004, www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=319
Ibid.
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan", jahon.mfa.uz/Z_P_News/muslim.html [archived at ]www.archive.org]
Rotar, "Uzbekistan: Sufism used for Uzbek propaganda in the USA"
Baran, Hizb ut-Tahrir – Islam's Political Insurgency, Acknowledgements
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan"
Ibid.
Human Rights Watch, World Report 2001, www.hrw.org/wr2k1/europe/uzbekistan.html
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "The Islamic Renaissance of Uzbekistan"
Ibid.
Hedieh Mirahmadi, "Sunni Disposition", May 7 2004, National Review Online, www.nationalreview.com/comment/mirahmadi200405070942.asp
Mateen Siddiqui, “The Doctrine of Hizb ut-Tahrir”, in The Challenge of Hizb ut-Tahrir: Deciphering and Combating Radical Islamist Ideology, ed. Zeyno Baran (Washington, DC: The Nixon Center, 2004), p. 1.
Michael Bugeja, quoted in Cunningham, Re-thinking Objectivity, www.cjr.org/issues/2003/4/objective-cunningham.asp
