Democracy: Is the Population Responsible for Killing Muslims?

By Hud Lesprit -July 4, 2022


It has become a recurrent trend where Muslims all over the World are deemed collectively responsible for terrorist attacks which have unfortunately lead to the deaths of civilians in the West.
When the pundits are mature enough to recognize that most Muslims have nothing to do with these killings, they instead blame Islam, alleging the religion to be the root cause of these violent transgressions.
This is just a petty attempt to try and seem tolerant while still blaming all Muslims. Undoubtedly, no true Muslim would say that he condemns Islam. So according to such a claim, this would make all Muslims moral allies to terrorists.
What is the difference, then, between blaming Islam and blaming Muslims?
RELATED: French Politician: Muslim Terrorism Happens Very Conveniently Before Elections
Now, let me first be very clear in stating that we condemn the actions of terrorist extremist groups and that they do not represent the true beliefs, laws, and teachings of Islam. They are shady individuals, criminals, often have questionable ties to various intelligence agencies, and are not known in the Muslim community for their knowledge or steadfastness. And often their Islam can even be doubted.
That being said, let us now talk about the Islamophobes that use this line of reasoning. 
These hypocrites quickly label all Muslims as belligerents, when they themselves are not willing to acknowledge the blood on their hands for their active role in the killing of millions of Muslims.
Nobody wants to take on the blame for the devastating crimes committed by democratic governments throughout the Muslim world.
Bush killed millions of Iraqis?
They will tell you:
“It is not my fault! He’s the one that did it, not me!”
But in a democracy, isn’t the head of state the representative of the population? One assumes power in such a system by the majority of the voters voting him into office. And those who did not vote for him still endorse the system which he used to get elected. They also recognize his legitimacy in representing them as the elected leader of their country.
RELATED: Why There Is No Such Thing as a Democracy in the Modern World
How then can anyone escape the logical conclusion that, when Bush commanded the killing of millions of Iraqis, every defender of democracy within the USA is also accountable?
They want Muslims to collectively assume the blame for 9/11, but who voted for Osama bin Laden?
Who voted for Cherif and Said Kouachi, or the murderers of Charlie Hebdo?
Who voted for Omar Mateen before he killed dozens of people in Orlando?
Muslims certainly didn’t. All Muslims of sound mind know that these individuals strayed far from the true beliefs, laws and teachings of Islam, and we would never accept these criminals as our representatives.
RELATED: Maryam Petronin: The Ex-Hostage Macron Doesn’t Want You To Know About
Meanwhile, most of the killings against Muslims in the last century have been perpetrated by elected officials who were chosen and appointed by the population. And the citizens are to blame according to the principles of democracy.
Certainly, most Western people do not want to be seen as culpable for the crimes of their governments, much like Muslims around the world do not want to be held accountable for the crimes of random terrorists. Unfortunately, most Western people are not aware of the crimes their governments commit due to the brainwashing they receive at the hands of the mainstream media.
But, as we have seen, Muslims have far more grounds to deny this accountability. It seems logical that, for Westerners to be able to deny accountability, they would have to renounce their governments and claim that they are not true representatives of the will of the people. Maybe they could renounce the concept of democracy as a whole and admit its deep flaws.
Until Westerners renounce the liberal philosophy underlying their bloodthirsty governments, they are in no position to criticize Muslims or Islam.

The Hypocrisy Behind Roe v Wade and Liberalism: Islam’s Solution

By Crypto Cranium -June 27, 2022

The liberal democrats are back at doing what the do best. Displaying their blatant hypocrisy and generating fear and panic among brainwashed individuals via mass media and misinformation.

The current Roe v Wade situation is a good example of both. First let’s take a look at their liberal hypocrisy with an example from Joe Biden:

President Joe Biden said Friday “the health and life of women in this nation are now at risk” after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion.

And this is what the liberal ‘Muslim’ politician Ilhan Omar had to say:

“This decision is devastating for millions of women and pregnant people across the country. I am outraged this right-wing court is turning the clock back on generations of progress and prohibiting individuals to have autonomy over their bodies.

Unfortunately, these leftist American politicians can’t stand the fact that the progressive degeneracy overshadowing their nation might now face obstacles due to the Satanic practice, i.e., abortion, being banned. Instead, they want to stand firm against any hope of family values being reintroduced into American society.

And it’s a mistake to think that these kinds of politicians care at all about the safety of women. Some of you might be confused by that. You may be thinking that well, aren’t Joe Biden and Ilhan Omar feminists, and so by extension, in favor of womens’ safety? The truth is, while they support the former, they couldn’t care less about the latter. Because the two are not synonymous. Feminism promotes women to have as much freedom as possible, no matter the physical, financial, spiritual, or psychological cost to them or the rest of society. It doesn’t care about the harms it causes women or anyone else, and so, it can’t be something that promotes their safety.

RELATED: Roe v. Wade: The Pro-Choice Movement Hall of Shame

Do you really believe that Joe Biden, the architect behind the War on Terror that resulted in the deaths of countless Afghan women and children, cares at all about the safety of women? Do you really believe that Ilhan Omar, the woman who voted in favor of unconditional support to Israel in the form of billions of dollars that turned the life of countless Palestinian women and children into hell, cares at all about the safety of women? It would be absurd to think so.

And American politicians aren’t the only hypocrites here. Let’s take a look at some of their fellow die-hard liberal political allies, starting with the devil, Emmanuel Macron:

“Abortion is a fundamental right for all women. We must protect it. I would like to express my solidarity with all those women whose freedoms have today been compromised by the U.S. Supreme Court,”

This is what Boris Johnson had to say:

“I’ve always believed in a woman’s right to choose and I stick to that view and that is why the UK has the laws that it does.”

Even Justin “Death Vaxx Dictator” Trudeau chimed in:

“No government, politician, or man should tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body.”

Look at how they rush to the aid of all the ‘helpless’ women in order to ensure their right to continue selling their bodies. In order to ensure their right to continue devaluing themselves by having sexual relations with countless men. In order to ensure their right to zero accountability and responsibility when it comes to making important decisions that will negatively impact their soul and psyche. In order to ensure their right to live as degenerate baby killers. Would the same apply for Muslim women though?

Would Macron stand with Muslim women’s right to wear Hijab? And when I say Hijab I mean the proper Islamically prescribed one, wherein a Muslim woman keeps herself away from non-Mahrams both physically and through her actions. Not the kind we have liberal Muslims displaying today, where a turban Hijab covers only part of the head and nothing else, and her whole life is to be the plaything of non-Mahram men.

Would Boris Johnson support a Muslim woman’s right to live a modest lifestyle? To live a life free of the pressures of feminism and liberalism? Would Justin Trudeau support the right of a woman to live in a traditional family as a housewife? Her right to marry early, instead of chasing careers and independence? The answer is obviously no because, if they cared about these things, they would support social policies, a legal regime, a media apparatus, etc., that promoted these things instead of their opposite. But they won’t do that because it contradicts liberalism.

They don’t care about women’s rights. They don’t care about the safety of women. And certainly not when it comes to Muslim women.

All that these liberal World Economic Forum minions care about is spreading degeneracy in order to gain votes and gain votes in order to spread degeneracy.

RELATED: “Muslim” Activists Melt Down Over Possibility of Abortion Ban

This brings us to our second point. Controlling the masses through fear.

For example, an article from Wired is now warning people that the overturning of Roe v Wade is going to lead to reduced privacy and more surveillance by the state. What? Even if this article is to be taken at face value, citizens of the U.S. are ALREADY under heavy surveillance, and this would just constitute an additional drop in the overflowing bucket of privacy invasion.

Anyone who has heard about whistleblowers like Edward Snowden understands that the privacy of American citizens is a joke. And if they’re so worried about surveillance, then how about protesting against actual laws that allow this kind of invasion of privacy. How about protesting against Big Tech companies like Apple, Google, and Meta, and holding their CEOs accountable, along with the governments they’re in bed with, instead of blaming an actual for once good decision by this country’s justice system?

An article by Forbes fears the economic effect that this decision is going to have on the country. Fewer women will now be able to pursue education and careers as they would now have to look after children at home born. Muslims need to understand that this is a good thing. We’re opposed to selling our Muslim women into universities that make them adopt feminist ideologies and pursue independence through careers. We’re opposed to selling our Muslim women into careerism where they will most likely become societal and corporate slaves, in a life where it will be near impossible for them to live by the tenets of Islam. We’re opposed to selling our Muslim women into a life where they will be middle aged yet without a family, unmarried and lonely, relying on cats and antidepressants.

One of the fears all these mainstream articles are propagating are the “health emergencies” and “pregnancy risks” that women will now allegedly face due to this ban. These liberal politicians are spewing the same garbage. If you remember back when COVID hit, this is the same tactic they were using. Forcing people into wearing masks, staying indoors, and getting the death vaxx by generating fear against a disease that did less damage than the common cold. Only, with this abortion ban this approach is just absurd, because abortion will still be legal under these medical emergencies:

The 13 states with abortion ban laws make exceptions for the life of the mother. These are typically cases of ectopic pregnancies, fallopian tube abscesses and ovarian abnormalities. Five of the states also allow abortions where pregnancy threatens a serious risk of substantial and irreversible injury. Utah is the only state that permits abortions in the case of a fatal fetal abnormality, which develops in about 3 of every 1,000 pregnancies.

So then, what’s the problem? Even when abortion is still going to occur in the rare exceptions involving medical emergencies. Again, it’s because women’s health and safety isn’t their concern here. They just want as much fahisha in society as possible.

This shows us the roots of ideologies like liberalism and feminism. At heart, they don’t care about what’s right, they care about unlimited freedom. They look at the temporary desires, not the long term harms. A woman should have the choice to fornicate immediately without having to think about the long term PTSD she’s going to develop from murdering her baby if she were to get pregnant and subsequently get an abortion as a result of this fornication.

And that’s the other thing. American society’s collapse is directly linked to how much freedom and empowerment women were given. That kind of a hedonistic lifestyle led to lesser and lesser gender segregation, which obviously led to rampant fornication. This hypersexualized society with decreasing morals is teeming with horrifying problems like new and dangerous STDs, young girls being increasingly sold into prostitution and human trafficking rings, the rise of pornography and subsequent objectification of women in advertisements and media as sex objects, etc. This progressive disease is nothing but a positive feedback loop of immorality. And what was the brilliant solution they came up with? To legalize abortion, thus facilitating the one thing that was keeping this problem from spiraling even more out of control.

Alcohol was a great contributor to this problem. And what was the solution for that? Did they ban alcohol? Again, no. In fact, alcohol production is now a very large and profitable business in the U.S.

In the name of freedom and choice, they keep facilitating decisions that promote even more and more degeneracy, and when someone questions it, they’ve devised these weak tactics of exaggerating the little things they are preventing by implementing their decisions. It’s like creating a hole in the ship, and letting water in. And when someone rightfully objects to it, giving arguments like “Well, the plants on the ship needed watering.”

Even deviant liberal Muslim organizations are using this argument, claiming that abortion is allowed in Islam under rare medical exceptions. Which, yes it is. But does that mean Muslims should support unlimited access to elective abortion? A great analogy is that if pork and alcohol are allowed in Islam under the rare circumstances of extreme starvation and thirst when no other food or drink is available, then does that mean Muslims should oppose any hypothetical bans on pork or alcohol in America?

We’ve gotten to a point where if a decision is taken that incentivizes people to get married and form families and makes them think twice before fornicating (and this doesn’t just apply to women, even husbands will be discouraged from cheating on their wives out of this fear), you have liberal Muslim groups in utter shock over it, misguiding the Ummah into thinking that this is a bad decision for Muslims. May Allah protect us and give us all the ability to see clearly through these kinds of deviants.



Muslims everywhere are going through a period of uncertainty, turmoil and suffering. Throughout the world, there appears to be a concerted effort to wipe out the very presence of Muslims. Bosnia, Somalia, Algeria are the better known examples of this onslaught, but Muslims are under attack in many other countries. Kashmir, Cambodia, Burma are examples. In South Africa, too, Muslims live in uncertainty. The country is experiencing a period of lawlessness and anarchy. There is an undermining fear of the future. Questions abound:
“What should we do?”
“Should we vote?”
“Whom should we vote for?”
“Why don‟t we get guidance from the Ulema?”
Islam does provide an answer, but the answers for Muslims are different from the answers for non- believers. The causes for the elevation or degradation of Muslims are not the same as they are for non- Muslims.
A student of Sheikh-ul-Hadith, Hazrat Maulana Zakarriya Saheb, asked seven questions. Hazrat Sheikh‟s reply was publised in a kitaab “Al-Eti‟daal Fe Maraatibur-Rijaal”. This kitaab not only provides answers to the problems we are facing, but serves as a guide according to which a Muslim‟s life can be conducted. It should be read and re-read. It should be studied carefully, so that full benefit can be derived from the advice and guidance of Hazrat Sheikh.
May Allah Ta‟ala fill the graves of all our pious elders with noor, particularly the grave of Hazrat Sheikh- ulHadith, (Rahmatullah Alayh). May He grant them a high place in Jannat and may He create in our hearts true love for Allah Ta‟ala and His Rasul (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam). May He make all of us think of and live our lives for the ultimate end i.e. success in the Aakhirat. Aameen.
Shabbir Ahmed Saloojee
Principal: Darul Uloom Zakarriya.
Ramadaan 1414
February 1994


Question of Brothers from West Africa:

Assalamu Alaikum waRahmatullah,

Respected Elders and Brothers,

Many provisions of the universal declaration of human rights and international laws, now assimilated and adopted in many majority Muslim constitutions, regard the rulings of the Shariah or Islamic law as unjust and against human dignity:

Hadd punishments – lashing, amputations of hands, stoning to death – are regarded by these constitutions as torture or inhumane treatment contrary to human dignity, and thus the whole Islamic criminal justice system is viewed as unjust, unjustifiable and unacceptable.

Under these laws, apostasy, a capital offence under Shariah rule is legalized and the offender is covered and protected by the provision of freedom of thought, conscience and religion which include the right to change one’s religion;

With the provisions giving the right to freedom of expression and the press, bad and evil people have the right to own, establish and operate any medium of information, ideas and opinions, some of which encourage immoralities, embark on social engineering programs against Islam, promotion of democracy, de-Islamization policies, etc through the media which are contrary to Islamic law.

Provisions give the right to freedom from discrimination which regard more legal rights to men as discriminatory against women, especially in the entitlement of the male heir with double share of that of the female in many cases of succession under Islamic law as well as in other domains of the Shariah.

With this constitutional situation prevailing in many Muslim countries (in fact, in all Muslim countries –The Majlis), and its devastating impact on every aspect of Muslim life, what is the program and advice for a Muslim to save himself and his family?


We are in the era which is in close proximity to Qiyaamah. This evil trend and satanic culture mentioned by you will only be incremental. Nothing will become better. All so-called Muslim countries are in the firm grip of kufr and shaitaaniyat. All regimes and governments in control of the lands of Islam are today confirmed Munaafiqeen, Murtaddeen and Kuffaar. The Deen is today only in Kitaabs, and true Muslims are all underground in their graves.

The stage for Dajjaal has been set. All the kufr regimes at the helm of Muslim affairs are reflections of the kufr and villainy of the masses. Allah Ta’ala imposes on people rulers who are a reflection of the deeds and misdeeds of the masses.

We are today in the age about which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) advised:

“Leave the affairs of the people!”

In other words: It is every man for himself. It is swim or sink. Be concerned with your own and your family’s moral reformation. The entire Ummah is rotten and the Ulama are rotten to the core. There is today no worse and no more villainous species of humanity than the ulama-e-soo’ whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) feared more than even Dajjaal. We are in the middle of a raging ocean being buffeted by storms of kufr, fisq and fujoor which are being promoted by the ulama-e-soo’ who are the primary cause for the destruction of the Ummah.

Brothers, there is nothing we can do other than to:

Be firm in Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar
Attend to our own moral reformation
Engage in Ibaadat
Be in seclusion as much as possible

Look after yourselves and your immediate families – forget about others. The time will soon come when a man will wish to be in the grave. It will become extremely difficult and even dangerous to keep your Imaan afloat. Just make dua and hope for the best. We are in a veritable spiritual minefield. Walk with care otherwise you will blow up your Imaan. Was-salaam

1 Zul-Qa’dh 1443 – 2 June 2022

Nuclear Genocide: China Dropped “200 Hiroshimas” on Uyghur Muslims

On January 2, 1986, Associated Press (AP) announced that 2,000 Uyghur students had staged a protest against the Beijing government in the East Turkistan capital of Urumqi. According to the information in the news, demonstrations were held not only in Urumqi, but also in Beijing and Shanghai. The main thing that pushed Uyghur students to seek their rights was the nuclear tests conducted by the Chinese communist regime in the Lop Nor region.(1) According to the findings of the Japanese scientist Takada, it is estimated that about 194,000 people died as a result of the impact of nuclear tests.(2)
The Beijing government conducted 45 nuclear weapons tests from 1964 to 1996, 22 underground and 23 above the surface. Enver Tohti, who worked as a doctor in the cancer department in East Turkistan for many years, revealed the effects of these nuclear tests, which many describe as genocide, by identifying the relationship between a type of cancer called ‘lymphomas’ and nuclear tests. Tohti said:

“Lymphomas are a group of cancers in which cells of the lymphatic system become abnormal and begin to grow uncontrollably. Since there is lymph tissue in many parts of the body, lymphomas can begin in almost any organ of the body. I consulted my textbooks to find the commonalities of these cancer types. I’ve found that they can all be started by radiation. I have made a link to the health problems of my patients related to the release of radiation from the [nuclear] tests.”(3)

Looking at the historical background of the Chinese communist regime’s nuclear tests, it is seen that the Beijing government also participated in the Cold War-era show-of-force race. After the Korean War in the mid-1950s, the first steps were taken with the support of the Soviet Union. The design of the first nuclear weapon began at the Institute of Physics and Atomic Energy in Beijing, and the enrichment of uranium began in Lanzhou. However, for a short time, Moscow’s relations with Beijing deteriorated. After tensions between Khrushchev and Mao, the Soviet leader withdrew his support entirely. Khrushchev also canceled the plan to deliver prototypes to China in 1959. Mao, who closed his country’s doors to the world, accelerated his own nuclear research. The first nuclear testing project was called 59-6 based on this date.(4)

The Chinese Communist regime chose the Lop Nor region, an area within the borders of occupied East Turkistan, home to Muslim Uyghurs, for their nuclear tests. Three years after the first nuclear test attempt, on June 17 1967, China conducted its first hydrogen bomb test, again in the Lop Nor area. The actual data on how these tests affect people’s lives in a region where 20 million people live, the majority of whom are Uyghur, Kazakh, Kyrgyz and other Turkic communities, could not be revealed due to the non-transparent governance of China.(5) The Chinese communist regime has tried to hide all its activities in the region from the world. However, Japanese Academic Jun Takada stated that the tests at Lop Nor had greater negative effects than the damage caused by the Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union in 1986. In 1996, two months before the Beijing government signed the Agreement on the Prohibition of Nuclear Tests, it announced that it had conducted its last nuclear test on June 29, 1996. (6)

The effects of these nuclear tests conducted in East Turkistan has emerged over time. Almost all tests had an earthquake effect, and they were so common that when people felt a tremor, they would say ’nuclear test, not earthquake’. Dr. Ilham Tohti is one of those who have seen the impact of nuclear tests since childhood. In an interview he describes the radioactive clouds that appeared as a result of the communist Chinese regime’s nuclear tests:

“For three days, it was as if the sky had rained down on the ground. No sun, no moon. When the children asked their teachers, the answer they received was that it was from a storm on the planet Saturn.” (7)

Dr. Anwar Tohti saw the damage of China’s nuclear tests more closely from patients who came to the hospital when he started working as an expert after graduating from medical school. As a result of his examinations on incoming patients, he began to investigate why there were so many cancer patients and similar complaints in the region. That is where his research led him to find the link between lymphoma and radioactive substances. In order to combat this situation, he also became an activist in 1995.(8) According to Tohti’s information, nuclear tests in the Lop Nor region were also carefully monitored by nuclear physicists affiliated with the Soviet Union at that time in the neighboring country of Kazakhstan. This was because the radio-actively charged clouds that appeared after each attempt extended to Almaty in Kazakhstan.

On the other hand, considering the proximity of the Soviet Union’s nuclear test area in Kazakhstan to East Turkistan, it is obvious that the Kazakh people in that region in particular suffered twice as much both from China’s tests and from the Soviets’ tests.(9) Tohti conducted research on the effect of cancers caused by radioactive damage in East Turkistan in July 1998 for 6 weeks and brought together many documents. Only between 1990 and 2000, cases of cancer in the region doubled.(10) Further data showing the danger of the situation in East Turkistan, the homeland of the Uyghurs, relates to cancer treatment centers. In the Henan region, where 100 million people live, there was only a capacity of 500 beds for cancer in 1997, while this figure increased to 800 in 2008. However, the bed capacity reserved for cancer patients in East Turkistan, where 20 million people live, was 2000 in 2008. (11)

According to the findings of British journalist Andrew Buncombe, the rate of cancer and similar diseases of radioactive origin in East Turkistan, where nuclear tests are carried out, is 39 percent higher than in other parts of China. According to the reports of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), the most secret experiments in this area were conducted by China. Examining the impact of tests in the region with the CND and speaking to many victims, Dr. Laura Watson said, “It is clear that radiation is the most obvious cause of cancer and similar diseases. At the same time, there is a huge increase in the frequency of the appearance of ordinary diseases. It not only leads to diseases such as in the liver or lungs, but it can also cause leukemia.” Research also discovered that there are children with severe birth deformities and terrible diseases. Cases of inability to walk due to a degenerative disease seen in an 18-year-old teenager whose past is included in the report are very common. Some children have also been exposed to diseases such as instability of bones and muscle loss. (12)

Japanese Scientist Takada, who published the book on China’s Nuclear Tests, determined that the bombs detonated in Lop Nor, some of which were 3 megatons, produced an effect 200-times stronger than the one dropped on Hiroshima. Takada, who started to examine the nuclear tests of the USA, France and the Soviet Union in the 1990s, was invited by scientists from Kazakhstan to conduct investigations in the region close to the East Turkistan border. Takada, who was not allowed to cross the border due to the dictatorial system of the communist regime, conducted his studies in Kazakhstan. He applied models he used to measure the effect of nuclear tests in the Soviet era to East Turkistan, and calculated that an estimated 194,000 people would have died due to acute radiation exposure. The number of people who received radiation high enough to cause leukemia, solid cancers or fetal damage was calculated to be around 1.2 million. Takada’s determination that ‘My figures are based on minimum estimates’ should also be noted. (13)

Timothy Mousseau, Associate Director of the Chernobyl Research Initiative at the University of South Carolina, noted that the impact of China’s nuclear tests will continue to be seen over time, so it is not possible to reach a full conclusion. “Nevertheless, it should be noted that it seems that there are serious genetic damages in people living in these regions,” Mousseau concluded.(14) Another proof of the Beijing government’s nuclear genocide of Muslim Uyghurs is that the communist regime ignores the people of East Turkestan, while paying compensation only to Chinese soldiers serving there. Dr. Tohti pointed out that it is very difficult for Uyghurs to access health facilities, saying, “They cannot afford healthcare costs. The only thing they can do is wait to die.” (15)

The work of the Chinese communist regime on alternative energy sources such as nuclear energy, which is a most important need, is also being carried out from East Turkistan. Today, one third of the uranium used by China for nuclear energy is taken from the Yili region in the homeland of the Uyghurs. The Communist regime has turned East Turkistan into a center for nuclear energy. Despite such a large-scale nuclear industry, no steps have been taken to protect the health of Uyghurs. (16) The Beijing government, which has been conducting uranium enrichment studies more effectively since 2008, currently has a total of 62 nuclear reactors, 44 of which are active and 18 of which are under construction. It aims to obtain 20% of its energy from nuclear sources in 2030.

Although concerns about nuclear energy are beginning to arise among the Chinese people, the Beijing government is silencing them with an iron fist. (17) In recent years, there have also been signs in the international community that China is breaking its promises under global arms control. The US State Department’s report for 2020 expresses concerns that China has started nuclear tests again in the Lop Nor region.(18) According to Rod Lyon, an expert at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), China increased its activities at the Lop Nor nuclear site throughout 2019. China carried out activities such as building new test sites and explosives storage rooms. In doing all this, it also occasionally closed the data channels that should be open under the International Monitoring System (IMS). These steps, which lack transparency, are being followed with concern by other countries. (19)

Source: Islam21c


1- “Uighur Students Demonstrate In Xinjiang” – Associated Press –

2- Merali, Zeeya “Did China’s Nuclear Tests Kill Thousands and Doom Future Generations?”

3- Gelis, Ursula, “‘The Peoples Bomb’: China’s Nuclear Weapons Testing Program” – IKFF –

4- “16 October 1964 – First Chinese Nuclear Test” – CTBTO –



7- Merali, Zeeya “Did China’s Nuclear Tests Kill Thousands and Doom Future Generations?”

8- Gelis, Ursula, “‘The Peoples Bomb’: China’s Nuclear Weapons Testing Program” – IKFF –


10- IBID

11- IBID

12- Buncome, Andrew, “China’s secret nuclear tests leave legacy of cancer and deformity” – The Independent

13- Merali, Zeeya “Did China’s Nuclear Tests Kill Thousands and Doom Future Generations?”

14- IBID

15- IBID

16- Rao, Tara – “Nuclear Imperialism in China’s Xinjiang” – ORF –

17- IBID

18- “2021 Adherence to and Compliance With Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments” – U.S Deparment of State –

19- Lyon, Rod, “Is China in breach of its nuclear-testing commitments?” – ASPI –

The UK Is Exporting Anti-Muslim Policies to Regimes That Tolerate Calls to Exterminate Muslims

Prevent, an oppressive tool which undermines government criticism, is being shared by the UK with an oppressive government that tolerates calls to exterminate Muslims.After several months of scrutiny, analysis, and review, the People’s Review of Prevent has now published its findings.

Whilst Prevent has been dealt a series of fatal blows, from its basis and operationalisation, to the culture it has fostered, disturbingly, Prevent is paraded abroad by the UK government before repressive  regimes. Indeed, the People’s Review of Prevent has found[1] that Prevent’s counter-extremism mechanics that undermine criticism of state actions “are transferred as part of an ‘export-oriented’ Prevent industry”.[2] Alongside, China,[3] India is another country the UK has disturbingly chosen to engage with on the topic of “extremism”.

A genocidal culture against Muslims

Three months ago, in December 2021, the leader of a group of Hindu religious leaders in India were recorded[4]addressing a gathering that included at least one member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), currently led by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The person is recorded as saying: “Even if just a hundred of us become soldiers and kill two million of them [Muslims in India], we will be victorious … If you stand with this attitude only then will you able to protect ‘sanatana dharma’ [an absolute form of Hinduism].”[5]

Another person is heard saying “Like Myanmar, the police, politicians, the army and every Hindu in India must pick up weapons and do this cleansing. There is no other option left.”[6]

Like other nationalist governments, the BJP rouses hard-line anti-Islamic sentiment through tacitly condoning violent right-wing organisations, or in some cases through an open affiliation.[7]

Using violent right-wing organisations to spark and then justify anti-Muslim hatred

For India’s Modi, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a paramilitary organisation linked to the Hinduvta, provides the engine for his party’s anti-Islamic animus.

In this symbiotic arrangement, the BJP  provides a veneer of “democratic” respectability to hard-edged anti-Muslim hatred and calls for extermination.

Over ten years ago, WikiLeaks revealed that Rahul Ghandi, an Indian MP – remarked to US Ambassador Timothy Roemer that the RSS was a “bigger threat” to India than Laskhar-e-Tayiba, a proscribed organisation that operates against India in Pakistan.[8]

Modi’s support for the RSS is not-so clandestine and goes back several decades. In 1992, the RSS’s orchestrated burning of the Babri mosque, a 16th-century mosque in the town of Ayodhya, which set off religious riots in which 2000 people were killed, was linked to Modi.

The fire was preceded by a BJP tour of the area two years previously. At that time, a BJP leader paraded into Ayodhya in a Toyota decorated like a chariot, to rouse the local Hindu people. Modi was the show’s “logistics” man.

So, it is not surprising that Modi and other Hindu leaders kept silent[9] on the statements made late last year at the Hindu rally, despite the fact that such statements amount to “hate speech” and “incitement” as defined by the UN in its statements on genocide prevention.[10]

Hindu nationalists in India are exerting more influence on the public by using the notion of an “enemy within”, an “insurgency” or coming Islamic “hordes”. In this brutal but now obvious strategy, “counter-insurgency” or “counter-extremism” are interchangeable and mutually justifying terms.

This “clash of civilisations” ideology is required by nationalists to survive, but in yielding to it,  they conform to the definitions of “extremism” they claim to want to prevent.

India’s tyrannical right-wing nationalism raises key questions about the orientation of Britain’s own Conservative government to politically active Muslims, and the mechanics of its Prevent policy – because behind the niceties, startling parallels emerge.

Co-operation between UK and India on defence and security tech 

More broadly, under the Conservative government, the UK has ignored strong UN pronouncements on India’s human rights abuses, and instead forged stronger security and defence links with India.

However, the Indian Army has been the subject of multiple allegations of extreme human rights abuse, especially related to its operations in Kashmir.

The first UN report[11] on Kashmir, released in 2018, called for an “urgent” international inquiry into multiple violations, including civilian killings, enforced disappearances, mass rape, and pellet-firing protestors:

According to official figures, 17 people were killed by shotgun pellets between July 2016 and August 2017, and 6,221 people were injured by the metal pellets between 2016 and March 2017. Civil society organizations believe that many of them have been partially or completely blinded.[12]

The report also highlighted the  impunity created for the Indian army in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. This impunity is now broadly accepted by human rights lawyers as being enabled by the discriminatory and speculative legislative environment of the War on Terror, which allows abuses to be sold under the banners of “counter terrorism” and “counter-extremism”.

Today, this environment – as could have been reasonably predicted by savvy journalists at the time – has unfurled and extended to enable the Indian government to declare war on Muslims in India.

Nonetheless, in October last year, UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss sailed into the bright and breezy bay of Mumbai on a UK warship, in the name of “developing security and defence tech” with India.

The Home Office press release announcing the Foreign Secretary’s visit to India mentioned a “landmark” 2030 Roadmap[13] on “maritime security, cyber security and counter terrorism”. The Road Map had been signed earlier last year by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Modi.

The Home Office stated that Truss’s visit “underlines the UK’s increasing defence, security and maritime co-operation with India and the wider region”. Washington also arrived at the party, adding US F35B fighter jets to a flyby of UK jets.

Data gathering and surveillance of protestors

What is remarkably clear in India – and should serve as a warning sign to all those concerned with justice in the UK – is how rapidly the War on Terror has become a war on general dissent against ethno-nationalism, racism, and anti-Islamic policy.

The Cold War-like tactics[14] of Prevent have employed the same lens –thanks to its revamped versions that have resulted after successive “reviews”. As the People’s Review of Prevent report documents in detail, Prevent “interviews” and “referrals” are collecting points for data on individuals, including from young children.

In December 2019, as protests against a controversial new citizenship law swept India, three incidents in different parts of the country revealed the state’s attempts at surveillance[15] of dissent. In Delhi, police officers used facial recognition devices to screen individuals entering a protest venue.

In what is becoming a common phenomenon in protests throughout the world, surveillance drones circle[16] above a protest marches, such as a recent march in Chennai, India. In Hyderabad, police stopped[17] a pedestrian and fingerprinted him to check for “past criminal activity”.

This stop-and-search approach to communities is familiar to Muslims, people of colour, environmental activists, aid workers and even lawyers in the UK.

It has been documented in policies such as Schedule 7 and Prevent, key data collecting points in Britain’s unfurling “counter-terrorism” and “counter extremism” architecture.

Silent complicity in the name of “counter terrorism”

Evidence shows that the ethno-nationalist government in New Delhi has leveraged the global clarion call of “counter terrorism” and its accompanying laws – such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act – to silence pushback against their violence against Muslims. They have done this by framing efforts to attain justice as part of an “insurgency”.

This framing of non-violent efforts to achieve justice for abuse, is telling in itself – but the orientation of New Delhi is made even clearer by the harassment and detention of lawyers and journalists, as concluded in Human Rights Watch’s World Report 2021[18], and what Amnesty International states is a “selective” application of the principle offreedom of expression.In a letter to the Indian government[19] on March 31, 2021, where they wrote of their concerns, five UN special rapporteurs highlighted the cases of three Kashmiri men held under “counter terrorism” laws – in particular, Waheed Para, a member of the Jammu and Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party, which administered Jammu and Kashmir in an alliance with the BJP until 2018:

“He was held in a dark underground cell at sub-zero temperatures, was deprived of sleep, kicked, slapped, beaten with rods, stripped naked and hung upside down. His ill-treatment was recorded. Para was examined by a government doctor three times since his arrest last November and three times by a psychiatrist. He requested medication for insomnia and anxiety,” the rapporteurs’ letter said.

How “counter extremism” facilitates tyranny

That states are leveraging “counter terrorism” and “counter-extremism” – which aims to “identify” those who present “risks” to the state based on a warped pre-crime argument readily manipulated by tyrannical leaders – at the expense of human rights, is not new.

However, that “counter terrorism and “counter-extremism” are making countries more prone to tyranny and abuse is only recently being noticed more broadly.

Grassroots efforts in Britain, such as the People’s Review of Prevent,[20] to highlight the dangers of counter-extremism policy not just to Muslims, but to political dissenters and even to governance itself – through the threat it poses to the survival of the public sector in the UK –  are gathering support.

These should foster strong calls for legal enquiries into those who threaten social unity through “counter terrorism” and “counter extremism”. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to act on the conclusions of[21] the People’s Review of Prevent that, “practitioners caught up in Prevent, community groups, trades unions and professional associations, and civil society groups to demand that Prevent be withdrawn”, and the government withdraws its Prevent strategy “on the grounds that it is ineffective, disproportionate and discriminatory”.

Instead, many of those trumpeting “counter-extremism” in the UK, from within and outside the British government, have not only remained silent on India’s outright violence against Muslims, but have lent their support and even their “expertise” to the Modi government. This should raise the question: just who are the real “extremists” here?

When governments turn against people who speak up, under claims of “insurgency”

Two months prior to the Al Jazeera video in which members of India’s ruling party quietly applauded calls for the extermination and expulsion of Muslims from India, the British government released a press statement[22] in which Baroness Williams, the British Minister for Countering Extremism spoke about “Tackling Insurgent Ideologies”.

Her speech opened a three-day conference between London and New Delhi. Describing counter-extremism as “complex”, Baroness Williams without a sliver of irony, stated that India was “the largest democracy in the world”.

She underlined the importance of Britain and India’s “shared work to counter terrorism”, stating that the conference was “a great opportunity for us all to reflect on the challenges we are facing … share best practice, and establish how we can and must continue to work together”.

Britain’s co-operation with India is just another sign that it is time to consider “extremism” – that is substantively far worse than any Prevent definition of “extremism” – as a feature within Britain’s very own government; it is another example of the UK transporting Prevent around the globe.

Source: Islam21c







[6] Ibid.






[12] UN (2009) ‘First-ever UN human rights report on Kashmir calls for international inquiry into multiple violations’












A Concerned Sister from Pakistan writes:

“I have written letters to Muftis, Maulanas and a Buzrug to mention the name of MBS and to condemn him for his latest move of evil of setting up ten cinemas in Madinah Munawwarah.
Mufti Taqi Uthmani Saheb tweeted these two lines on twitter:

‘Now there is a plan of establishing ten cinema halls in Madinah Munawwarah – Inna lillaahi wa Inna ilayhi Raajioon. Words are unable to (adequately) express grief for this. ‘What is there no rightly guided (or intelligent) man among you?”

(Commenting further, the Sister says):
It is really a shame! I asked him if he will tell Allah Ta’ala on the Day of Qiyaamat: ‘I wrote these two lines’? I also wrote to him to explicitly mention the name of the murtad, MBS and to condemn him.” (End of the Sister’s letter)

Our Comment
Allah Ta’ala states in His Qur’aan Majeed: “If you turn away (abandon your obligation), then He (Allah) shall substitute you with others who will not be (so treacherous) like you.” When the Ulama abandon their Fardh obligation of Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar, then Allah Ta’ala appoints even laypeople and even fussaaq to execute this duty. While the Ulama are largely silent like ‘dumb devils’, pious lay people such as this Concerned Sister, take over the responsibility of Amr Bil Ma’roof.

Taqi Sahib’s two-lined extremely lukewarm comment is never a valid discharge of the obligation of Amr Bil Ma’roof. In fact, due to his close embrace with the fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar government personnel, he utterly lacks the spiritual stamina for proclaiming the Haqq as is required by Allah Azza Wa Jal.

Justifying the plan for the construction of ten brothels in Madinah Munawwarah and thereby converting this Holiest of Islam’s Cities into the stinking, rotten, immoral likes of western cities, the Son of Iblees (MBS) said that the cinemas will not be within the precincts of the Haram (the holy sanctuary) of Madinah Munawwarah. It will be beyond this boundary. This is a satanic delusionary argument which may fool and delude morons. Only those whose brains are denuded of intelligence will swallow this notoriety.

In terms of the Shariah, relevant to the Ahkaam of the Deen, the entire Arabian Peninsula, in fact every Muslim land, are Harams where the imposition of the Shariah is Waajib. An act or an institute which is haraam (unlawful), is not haraam only within the precincts of the boundaries of the Harams of Makkah and Madinah. Anything which is haraam according to the Shariah, remains haraam in all places, not only in the two Harams. Therefore, brothels and cinemas are haraam even beyond the Haram precincts of Madinah Munawwarah. Thus, the justification proffered by the Munaafiq/Murtad MBS shaitaani creature has absolutely no validity.

The proposed establishment of ten cinemas in Madinah Munawwarah was expected. In fact, the next step of licensed brothels in faithful emulation of Hollywood, Bollywood and Ibleesywood should come as no surprise despite the grief and lamentability with which the hearts of the Mu’mineen will be stricken. The kuffaar regime currently in sway, has effectively converted Arabia into Daarul Kufr. The stage is elaborately being prepared for Dajjaal.

The MBS Munaafiq/Kuffaar regime has abolished the Fardh Salaat in the Haram Shareef. It has banned Jumuah Salaat. It has banned Hajj and Umrah. In a nutshell, it has abolished the entire Shariah. Using the covid plot of the atheists as cover, the MBS regime is incrementally introducing more draconian laws of kufr to ensure prevalence of the conspiracy of Iblees. But, they all are stupidly unaware that while they plot, Allah Ta’ala too plots, and He is the best of plotters. Their conspiracies will be reduced to failure.

Everything, down to the minutest detail, is in reality the decree of Allah Ta’ala. Whatever is happening today will run its course and come to an end when the Divine Decree relevant to it signals termination. In this regard, the Qur’aan Majeed states:

“By Him are the keys of the Ghaib (i.e. what is unseen and unknown to us). No one knows this, but He. He is aware of whatever is in the land and the ocean. Not a leaf drops (from a tree), but He is aware. There is not a seed in the darkness of the earth nor anything moist or dry, but it is recorded in a Clear Book.”

Those Muslims, despite the prevailing state of kufr, who still desire to go to Saudi Arabia for a mock umrah and a mock hajj, are bereft of sincerity. In the name of Ibaadat their desire is to go for haraam holidaying.


A truly Islamic government based on the Shariah and the Sunnah cannot be found in any Muslim country of today. For a successful Islamic government (Khilafate), the essential requisite is a spiritually and morally reformed Islamic ummah. There does not exist any such Islamic ummah anywhere today in the Islamic world. Therefore, even if a pious man or group of Muslims succeed in installing themselves in government, they will not succeed in the endeavour to implement the Shariah because they will be confronted by corrupt Muslim masses who will not allow the Shar’i process to be introduced.
It was precisely for the successful implementation of the Shariah that Islamic government was preceded by a thirteen year period of spiritual and moral reformation during the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Once the community was Islamically prepared, there was no difficulty in the implementation of the Shariah among the masses.
It was not possible to introduce Islamic Law among masses who are inimical to the Shariah. A people who has become westernized and who has abandoned the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) will sabotage the deeni efforts of benign Islamic rulers. The rulers will be compelled to enlist the services of the un-islamic masses to maintain the working of the country. If those who man the country’s services have no Islamic inclinations and Islamic character, they will resort to a variety of stratagems and co-operate with the enemies to bring about the fall of the Islamic rulers. Roohani and Islaahi training are, therefore, essential for the success of any Islamic government.
It is not possible to implement the shariah in a corrupt community by force. There will be a need for large scale repression, imprisonment and killings if force has to be used to implement the Shariah among a people who has lost its Islamic character. The sunnah way is, therefore, Taleem. Muslims should be educated and the Sunnah explained to them. As long as Muslims do not adopt the Sunnah voluntarily, there is no hope for the success of any Islamic government.
The view of first capturing the means of power and then enforcing the Shariah in an inimical populace is to put the cart before the horse. There is no hope of success.
Muslims are so alienated from Islam, that they will readily vote for an unislamic party or any irreligious group to rule them rather than submit to Shar’i rule. Under such circumstances, one can only expect the wrath of Allah Ta’ala to descend on the Ummat. This is the lamentable plight of the present day Ummah all over the world. Muslims themselves have an aversion for Islam, hence they so quickly adopt foreign and immoral cultures as their ways of life. There is no wonder that so many hardships & disasters are settling over Muslims on all fronts.


The People Declare China Guilty of Genocide

On account of the evidence of torture, systematic suppression of births with intent to destroy a community, and crimes against humanity beyond reasonable doubt, the People’s Tribunal has concluded that the Chinese government is committing genocide against Uyghurs.
Many Uyghur activists and members of the public gathered at Church House Westminster on 9 December to hear the verdict by the Uyghur tribunal. “The allegations are of the gravest human rights violations and international crimes,” said Sir Geoffrey Nice, the tribunal’s chair.

The tribunal called out the haunting evidence of a million Uyghurs being subject to detention by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) without any remotely sufficient reason. Evidence confirmed that detainees were subject to inhumane cell conditions; up to 50 people would sometimes be locked in a 22 square metre cell – making it impossible to lie on concrete – while only being given a communal bucket for a toilet. Some of the torture methods included the pulling off of finger nails, beating with sticks, being restrained in tiger chairs – where feet and hands were locked in position for days, and being put in containers filled with cold water up to the neck. Men and women were subjected to extreme sexual violence, including gang rape, forced penetration with electric shock rods, and iron bars. These are just some of the cruel violations that have taken place and continue to take place in China’s detention camps.

Further methods of control were evidenced by mass disappearances of Uyghur members, Han men forced into Uyghur homes, mass securitisation, neighbours spying on neighbours, intense monitoring of ‘separatist’ behaviour, and the involuntary removal of thousands of children from their families in order to send them to Han state-run boarding schools.

Sir Geoffrey Nice pointed to the lack of evidence of mass killings, as well as Uyghurs being allowed to return to society for short or long periods of time. For this reason, comparisons to the Holocaust were described as “well-intentioned but unhelpful”. Whilst the common understanding of genocide assumes mass killings, this is not the only indicator considered by scholars. It also constitutes the systematic suppression of births, as well as the utter destruction and eradication of a people’s lineage, culture, religion, thought, beliefs, and values, as evidenced by the ‘re-education’ camps and ‘anti-terror’ methods used by the PRC.

The PRC’s intent to biologically destroy the Uyghurs by preventing births met the legal elements of genocide. Surmounting evidence pertaining to the forced sterilisation of Uyghur women was found after considering the frequent insertion of IUD devices, which are only removable by surgical means. In addition, further findings were presented, such as forced abortions at early and late stages of pregnancy, involuntary removal of wombs, as well as the killing of babies at birth.

“The tribunal is satisfied that President Xi Jinping and other very senior officials in the PRC and CCP bear primary responsibility” for acts that occurred in East Turkistan. Let there be no mistake: the PRC’s treatment of Uyghurs links back to their agenda to destroy and eradicate Uyghur religion and culture through the use of ‘anti-terror’, ‘anti-extremism ’, and ‘separatist’ rhetoric. The Chinese state has already destroyed 16,000 mosques and has even torn down cemeteries to build ‘cafes’. In addition, “displays of religious adherence” like attending a mosque, wearing a hijab, having a beard, and not drinking alcohol or eating pork have been proscribed by the state.

Former Guantanamo prisoner and prominent War on Terror critic Moazzam Begg questioned the tribunal about the evidence suggesting the PRC’s exploitation of the War on Terror narrative through the enactment of ‘anti-terror’ policies. “To what extent do you think it has exploited that language and has been able to get away with the targeting of Muslims in East Turkistan as ‘extremists’ and ‘terrorists’?” A member of the tribunal agreed that China was able to “sweep their Uyghur problem under the global war on terrorism. They actually persuaded the US to join in on the categorisation of a Uyghur group outside Xinjiang as a terrorist group. The application of that lasted up until 2018”.

After a year and a half of compiling detailed forms of evidence and finally coming to the necessary outcome of genocide, the public are probably thinking, “What now?” Politicians who were present at the press conference after the tribunal called on the UK government to use the readily available evidence and publicly recognise that a genocide is taking place. This is something they have never succeeded to do while a genocide was ongoing. They also request the UK government to place sanctions on Chinese imports and declare a full diplomatic boycott.

There is no doubt that this tribunal is a significant step in the right direction towards putting pressure on China to end their crimes against the Uyghurs. Alḥamdulillāh, the tribunal did what governments had no courage to do. Sir Geoffrey Nice alludes that both the US and the UK acknowledged China’s crimes, but have done nothing about it.

It would be naïve to place full hopes on those who only seek to further their socio-political agenda. The essence of the problem must be addressed, which is China’s state run policies to suppress and eradicate Muslims and other minorities in East Turkistan, where individuals are tortured and persecuted for their religion. Unless this is done, we cannot expect their actions to sincerely have the Uyghur people’s interests at heart. We wait for the UK to make an open statement about the genocide and actually make references to the list of crimes against humanity taking place. We hope this sends a message to much of the international community who have shown complicity in the heinous crimes against Uyghur Muslims, and urge them once again to take action.

May Allah hasten the Ummah to success and bestow justice upon the Uyghurs and thousands of others around the world being persecuted for their dīn. And last but not least, may He aid us in standing firm with our brothers and sisters.


Why is the world not recognizing the Taliban government?

More than three months have passed since the Taliban took over Kabul, but the world has yet to officially recognize the new government. Even the United States of America that took the lead in inking the Doha peace deal is still weighing the pros and cons of such a possibility.

This situation is lingering on, despite the United Nations warning that Afghanistan is facing a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented proportions and is on the verge of disaster.

So, what are the impediments in recognizing the new reality in Afghanistan, when almost all the stakeholders are in direct contact with the Taliban government?

Broadly, the world can be divided into three major groups on this issue.

The first and the foremost is led by the United States of America. It comprises the European Union, NATO members, most Middle Eastern countries, Japan and India. The second is the regional group that consists of Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, and a number of Central Asian Countries.

The rest of the world can be categorized into the third group that includes at least six countries from the non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

All these groups have similar views on at least a few points. They have unanimously asked the Taliban to form an inclusive government, ensure the rights of women and minorities and guarantee that Afghanistan will no more serve as the launching pad for global terrorist operations.

But, all is not as black and white. The truth lies somewhere in the grey area. And, these three groups remarkably differ from each other.

Let’s first consider a group led by the United States of America. The Biden administration has not openly demanded who should or shouldn’t be in the inclusive government. But, there are clear signs that Washington wants to see some significant figures of the previous governments be given important portfolios.

Thomas West, the US special envoy for Afghanistan, has recently participated in a two-day talk with the Taliban. These discussions have the potential to make some headways in economic support. But, the United States is in no hurry to recognize the Taliban. Why?

Well, after the September 11 attacks on the United States of America, Washington had declared the Taliban as a terrorist organization. Gradually, they were divided into reconcilable and irreconcilable ones. Hasn’t the time come to include currently banned figures in the reconcilable ones as they have submitted themselves to the Doha Peace Agreement?

Till now, international pressure to take them out of the cabinet hasn’t worked. There are least chances that it will. True, the Taliban have accommodated dozens of Afghans by giving them ceremonial positions. But, it’s an admitted fact that the top hierarchy remains the same.

This stubbornness has raised some eyebrows in Russia, China, and Iran, who also want a truly inclusive government that represents all the main ethnic and political groups. This second group is also keeping mum about naming those who they want to see in the government.

But, each member of this group wants a friendly and independent Afghan government, which diplomatically means less dependent on the group led by the United States of America.

This second group pretends that it is equally not in a hurry to recognize the Taliban. In reality, with every passing day, this group is becoming more concerned about why the world is not coming to terms with the new reality of Afghanistan.

The reason is obvious. Pakistan, Iran, China, Russia, and the Central Asian countries have more stakes in the region. For this reason, they had cultivated ties with the Taliban long before the fall of Kabul.

The increasing presence of Daesh in Afghanistan has given these countries another reason to join hands. After all, this group has long faced one terrorist organization or the other.

Moscow can’t afford another Beslan Siege of 2004 when 32 Chechen terrorists took 1,200 children and adults hostage and killed at least 330 in a primary school.

China equally wants to stop the resurgence in Xinjiang where Uighur militants killed 39 people in a vegetable market in 2014. Any such incident now has the potential to cast a shadow over the security of the One Belt One Road initiative as Xinjiang connects China with eight major countries.

Iran, already facing a biting economic situation, is putting up all efforts to stop elements seeking instability. It’s a country where militants disguised as soldiers killed 25 people in the Ahvaz military parade, during sacred defense week.

Pakistan is the worst-hit country. In a few days, the nation will mourn the Army Public School massacre that had shocked the whole world.

But by recognizing the Taliban, the world can strengthen them to go against Daesh and affiliated groups that seem to have a bigger agenda in the region and beyond. It will also avert total economic collapse and lawlessness that is serving as the breeding ground for extremist ideologies.

As far as the Taliban are concerned, they should also realize that an inclusive government will strengthen not weaken their rule.

NASIM HAIDERThe author is Controller News at Geo News