Islam is the real positive change that you need to change for being a better person or a perfect human being, you can change yourself if you read QURAN, IF YOU DO THAT !! you will change this UMMAH, say I am not A Sunni or Shia, BUT I am just a MUSLIM. Be a walking QURAN among human-being AND GUIDE THEM TO THE RIGHT PATH.
A
century ago today, a 36-year-old author and purported Arabist named
Mark Sykes made his way to 10 Downing Street in London to meet the
leaders of Britain and discuss the tricky issue of dividing the spoils
of the collapsing Ottoman Empire.
The only son of the quirky Sir Tatton Sykes, a landed Yorkshire
gentleman, Mark Sykes first travelled to the Middle East as a wealthy,
11-year-old tourist. His early adult travels through the Arab world
coincided with the final years of Ottoman decline. Thus, in books such
as The Caliphs' Last Heritage, he portrayed the empire as moribund and
Arabs as shiftless (one index entry reads "Arab Character: see also
'Treachery'").
In his works, Sykes made it appear as if he were fluent in
Turkish and Arabic, but he could speak neither, according to James
Barr's sharp 2011 history, A Line in the Sand. He found Mosul "a foul
nest of corruption, vice, disorder, and disease", and failed to note the
effect of arriving modernity, which by this time had begun to stir a
political consciousness known as the Arab Awakening, as detailed in
George Antonius' illustrative book.
Yet, Britain's brains trust - comprising, at this meeting,
Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith, War Minister Herbert Kitchener,
Munitions Minister David Lloyd George, who would soon become prime
minister, and First Lord of the Admiralty Arthur Balfour, who would soon
become foreign secretary - turned to him as a leading expert. Prophetic vision
"I should like to draw a line from the 'e' in Acre to the last
'k' in Kirkuk," Sykes told the assembled, detailing his plan to hand
Syria, Mount Lebanon and the northern tip of Iraq to the French, and
Palestine, Transjordan, and the rest of Iraq to the British.
Sykes met to discuss details of the plan with the French
negotiator Francois Georges-Picot five days later, but his initial
vision was roughly how Sykes-Picot was ultimately drawn up the next month. The deal was secretly finalised in May 1916, which is when the United States got wind of it.
The current situation, with ISIL at the fore, highlights a reality
Western leaders may be starting to appreciate: These lines are becoming
increasingly imaginary.
"It is all bad and I told Balfour so," Edward House, a foreign
policy adviser to US President Woodrow Wilson, explained to colleagues
at the time. "They are making it a breeding place for future war."
Few political predictions have proved more prophetic. Over the
intervening century, barely a handful of peaceful years have passed in
these lands. And so it is today, as locals and world powers alike play
desperate, shifting roles in a complex, seemingly endless conflict.
House also complained that the British and French remained
unclear on whether they intended permanent occupation of these
territories, or merely exclusive rights to their resources. There was,
of course, a very good reason for this. "As a hypothetical division of
country that neither of its signatories yet controlled, it was extremely
vulnerable to events," Barr wrote.
Perhaps never have European imperial powers been more shameful
than they were in implementing Sykes-Picot, in 1919. As a sentient human
being, I generally have great difficulty agreeing with the Islamic
State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) on anything. But the group's
dismissal of these lines drawn by far-off, profit-seeking foreign
officials, cutting across ethnic, linguistic, and religious divisions
and all but ensuring long-term mayhem, is hard to dispute.
In implementing Sykes-Picot, Entente powers reneged on promises
of freedom and independence for Arabs and instead snatched control of
local populations and their resources. They also left enough border
ambiguity as to allow for the future denial of Arab control of Palestine
- a nexus of Muslim resentment to this day.
Mark Sykes in 1913 [Getty]
Conquer and control
Sykes-Picot is ideal shorthand for ISIL's grievances against
the West - its interventionism, its condescension, its grab for power
and resources, its creation of make-believe states with hollow
democratic institutions, its dismissal of Arab and Muslim will, leading
to the fragmentation of the region. It provides enemies of the West with
the perfect example of "kuffar" (a derogatory word meaning
non-believer) efforts to conquer and control.
In a 2014 video called "The End of the Sykes-Picot Agreement",
an ISIL jihadi from Chile crosses the former Iraq-Syria border, now
rendered meaningless in this barren stretch of desert controlled by the so-called Islamic State. OPINION: The roots of Syria's tragedy
This is not the first time Arab groups have rejected Sykes-Picot.
Several times in the post-war period Arab nationalist groups such as the
Federation of Arab Republics, have attempted to offer a pan-Arabist
alternative.
But the current situation, with ISIL at the fore, highlights a
reality Western leaders may be starting to appreciate: These lines are
becoming increasingly imaginary. The Arab Spring was not merely a
throwing off of dictatorships. It was also a bucking of these barely
there states and institutions foisted on Arabs by the West a century
ago. OPINION: T E Lawrence naivete lives on
In addition to the collapse in Syria and Iraq, we've seen the
creation of spheres of influence in Libya and Yemen. Israel has long
been vague about its eastern border. And the great wave of migrants and
refugees from the region attests to the failure of Sykes-Picot - and
Western interventionists more broadly - to create legitimate, lasting
states.
In recent weeks, two prominent Western voices have publicly
expressed similar sentiments. William Hague, Britain's former foreign
secretary, wrote
that the Sykes-Picot borders "should not be considered immutable". He
praised the Kurds for their ability to manage their own region, and
called for partition.
John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, announced
that "Iraq and Syria as we have known them are gone". He urged
Washington to help create a new, independent Sunni state to replace the
so-called Islamic State.
These prescriptions may have some merit. But these two politicians are probably even less knowledgeable
about the Arab world than Mark Sykes was a century ago, and their plans
sound suspiciously like self-interested foreign powers "drawing lines
in the Middle Eastern sand".
Will we ever learn? David Lepeska is a freelance journalist based in Istanbul. His work focuses on Turkey and the Middle East. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy. Read more: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/12/middle-east-breeding-place-war-sykes-picot-isil-151214083200387.html
Incident was sparked by march Saturday to commemorate prophet's birthday
Nigerian army's chief of staff was caught in the gridlock
Senator: 'This was how Boko Haram started'
Kano, Nigeria (CNN)The
Nigerian military launched an attack on a Shia Muslim group in one of
the country's northern cities over the weekend, killing numerous people
after a military convoy got stuck by a march.
The
trouble began Saturday, when thousands of members of the Islamic
Movement of Nigeria, a pro-Iranian Shia group, held a march in Zaria, in
Kaduna State, to mark the birthday of the Prophet Mohammed.
The Nigerian Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Yusuf Buratai, and his convoy wound up trapped in the gridlock.
According
to some accounts, a metal object was thrown at the general's vehicle by
someone in the crowd. Soldiers mistook the sound for gunshots and
apparently thought it was part of an attempt to assassinate the general.
At any rate, soldiers in the
convoy opened fire, killing a number of people. Members of the sect put
the number at more than 100.
ADVERTISING
Troops backed by tanks went to leader's home
After
receiving reports that members of the Islamic group were "mobilizing"
following the shootings at the march, troops targeted the group's
shrines and enclaves, according to Maj. Gen. Adeniyi Oyebade.
Troops
reportedly firebombed the Husseiniyya, the group's religious center,
and destroyed another religious center on the outskirts of the city.
In
the evening, the troops, backed by tanks, moved to the area where the
group's leader, Sheikh Ibrahim Zakzaky, lives. Hundreds of Zakzaky's
followers went to the house to try to prevent his arrest.
A night-long battle ensued, in which more people were killed. The home was firebombed and demolished.
The sect said Zakzaky's wife, Zeenat, was among the dead but the military said she and Zakzaky were in protective custody.
Senator condemns military's actions
An army spokesman acknowledged the loss of life but blamed members of the sect.
The
"incident," said Col. Sani Kukasheka Usman, was the "result of the
Shiite group members' blocking roads and not allowing other passers-by
to go about their lawful businesses and activities."
"It
is important to note that over the years this group has subjected
ordinary citizens using public roads to untold delays, threats and
disruption simply because they insist on using public space irrespective
of inconvenience and hardship on other law-abiding citizens and
motorists," Usman said. "This cannot be tolerated and must stop."
He
said police would conduct an inquiry as soon as order was restored. His
statement made no reference to a perceived assassination attempt.
But Shehu Sani, a senator representing Kaduna Central, criticized the military's actions.
"Nigeria
has not learned its lessons," Sani said. "This was how Boko Haram
started, with the extra-judicial killing of their leader in 2009. What
happened in Zaria was nothing but an act of brutality by the Nigerian
military."
Boko Haram is a brutal
militant Sunni group active in northern Nigeria. It is perhaps most
notorious for the April 2014 kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls from the town
of Chibok.
![In implementing Sykes-Picot, Entente powers reneged on promises of freedom and independence for Arabs, writes Lepeska [Getty]](http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2015/12/14/93d65e6e7804484ca29a0fbb8016c1bc_18.jpg "Middle East: A breeding place for war")
