In the name of Allah, Most Gracious and Most Merciful.
The editors of Kavkaz Center have invited Movladi Udugov to answer some questions of interest to readers of KC and comment on recent developments in the Arab world. The editors of KC are planning to hold discussions on developments in Russia and the Caucasus.
KC: The Arab revolution, sometimes called "The Arab Spring" has been taking place for nearly six months now, covering the land space from the ocean to the Gulf. It is not over, yet, and it hasn't taken the final shape. There is no question of global importance and significance of these events. Experts say that the stagnation is over, the Arab world has woken up and come into action. I wonder, if could anyone possibly predict the likely vector of the said action?
M. Udugov: In the name of Allah, praise to Allah, blessings and peace be upon Allah's Messenger.
Yes, the assessment is rather sober and balanced. To a certain extent, it sounds as a warning.
The importance of the Arab revolution, as the West see it, manifests itself through the following few points.
Let us take "Israel" - without explanation, it hastily proceeded to shut down its embassies and consulates or increase the security arrangements in a number of countries, including the ones in Latin America.
In an interview with CNN, President of "Israel" Simon Peres called for an "early conclusion of a peace agreement with the Palestinians". According to him, "time is running out for peace agreement and we have to act fast".
He believes that any failure of peace negotiations would jeopardize the future of "Israel" as a Jewish state with a Jewish demographic majority.
The second point - against the background of feigned indignation by the said "Israeli", Arab countries have been thrown in a stale carrot - to resume talks "regarding the 1967 borders with the Palestinians."
With a hint of neither remorse nor hesitation, Americans washed their hands of all the dictators who had been serving them with canine loyalty for a number of years.
In parallel, the Western alliance is trying to curb the Arab revolutions and to establish for them a single, non-alternative goal - the installation of new democratic puppet regimes from the ocean to the Gulf.
KC: Needless to say, from the very beginning we have tracked and reported all these developments; and our perspectives on these issues, in general, are well understood. But I would like to hear a more detailed report on the position and the vision of this movement. Mainly for the benefit of our readers so they could make sense of this tangle of facts, conjecture and outright misinformation presented by the sources of international media.
M. Udugov: Well, to begin with, we must promptly drop all talks about "the American hand", "Masonic foot", the Mossad, the CIA and other fables favored by the tabloids.
I agree with those commentators who have noted that neither the Americans nor NATO or any of their glorified intelligence anticipated these events, and at first they were completely taken aback. Confusion and uncertainty led to the decision to bomb Libya.
Naturally, the Western alliance and its allies will not just watch the fledging "Arab spring". Everyone - from the visionary- rabbis, who are dreaming that after the Arab revolution, "Greater Israel" will rule the Middle East to the prudent NATO strategists, count the number of bombs needed to overthrow Gaddafi - everyone will try to press down the lid on the seething Arab boiler.
KC: I would like to clarify regarding the conspiracy theories arising once this subject has been mentioned. What attitude should we pursue towards these conspiracies and theories? It has been customary to present "a conspiracy theory" as a kind of stupidity and ridicule it.
M. Udugov: The plot itself is sufficiently clearly present, of course, despite the efforts to deny it.
The truth is not in the plot itself but in the way it has been perceived.
There are two aspects of this story.
One - politicians, international financial movers and shakers, media magnates and others network and, of course, they agree and coordinate their activities in global politics. Moreover, we know that many of these individuals are linked with each other not only via personal or political contacts, but also at a family level.
The clans and secrecy are facts of life. And should someone believe that it is all too far-fetched, impossible, unbelievable and wants us to ridicule it, they are not being truthful with us, either.
But there is also the other one, the one which deserves to be laughed at. This is when the ignorant minds of the conspiracy theorists conjure some kind of fatal force that allegedly determines the course and outcome of all that is happening.
This is a fundamental difference in the assessment of a "world conspiracy" made by the ignorant and by Muslims.
The conspirators have nothing against inciting fear and intimidating opposition among the rest. While officially disavowing any conspiracy, those in power slyly spun various movie-like scenarios in the people's imaginations whenever these topics come up for discussion.
In the context of prevailing spiritual ignorance and rampant materialism, such a policy has its effect -non-believers develop a sense of total hopelessness.
On this opportunity, I wish to reminisce about the late Dzhokhar Dudayev. The more I think, the more firmly I believe that he was a talented politician representing his time. I remember how he used to laugh at all these Masonic themes and he used to say: "Drop all this nonsense..., see it for yourselves-get an automatic up the nostril of your mason and he will be bleeding yellow piss down his trousers".
What could be more ridiculous than the attribution of power and grandeur to the creatures that have been flushed twice down the urinary canal before appearing in this world?
Muslims, who know their religion, have no doubt that all these conspiracies and conspirators are merely the machinations of Shaytan. It is the Koran that states: "Shaytan snares the weak". In the Koran we trust and believe that no one possesses power and strength but Allah.
KC: From monitoring the coverage of events in the Arab world one can infer that some analysts, both Russian and Western are trying to move away from the banal propaganda clichés. They are describing the history of dictatorships and the uniqueness of the revolution that is taking place in the Arab world in an unbiased manner. In particular, it is quite interesting to notice that some of these commentators are in no hurry to make predictions. And rightly so.
M. Udugov: I couldn't agree more. Western society is frightened, and it hasn't got a clue how it all started, let alone knowing the outcome.
Revealing, in this regard, is the admission of the Americans that, for instance, they have not even once correctly predicted their next enemy - despite the enormous resources, "think tanks" and strategic operations research. Incidentally, this has been recently acknowledged by Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn, whom I quote:
"In fact, we have a particularly poor track record of projecting when, where and against whom we will fight. Secretary Gates has described our record in this regard as perfect -- we have never gotten it right".
The objective judgments you mentioned seem plausible at first sight. You may get this impression, as nowadays analysts describe in detail the political landscape that is out in the open for everybody to see. As a matter of fact, the mainstream media usually do not cover these topics from this particular point of view.
The so-called Orientalists are at a loss. Whilst accepting that these revolutions are not typical, they, nevertheless, keep on trying to cram that movement into the Marxist scheme: economic recession, rebellion of the hungry and so on.
KC: True. This is especially noticeable with regard to Egypt. No speech is complete without mentioning the infamous 2 dollars, amount used by an average Egyptian per day. As they say in here, you can't help but stir up a revolution. Although he contradicts himself, by adding that the case of 2 dollars can be a plausible rationale for the Egyptian scenario, but this analogy can't be applied to Libya, where you have people from all over the world that arrived with the purpose to earn money.
M. Udugov: Incidentally, for an Egyptian, $ 2 a day, that makes $ 60 a month, is not the end of the world. He won't be feasting, but he won't die of hunger, either. A lot of students make do there with 1.5 dollars a day. The reference to 2 dollars is used to shock the western people. After all, the American poor have to live on $ 700 a month, German for $ 950 and still it isn't enough.
KC: Bolshevik discourse is rather tenacious. Nikolai Berdyaev, a 20th century Russian philosopher remarked at the time that the Bolsheviks tend to sow discord among the people, elevating ordinary everyday difficulties to the rank of universal tragedy.
M. Udugov: This is by the way, the basis the political thinking of the Democrats has been built on. It is the way atheists think.
They talk in familiar terms about employment, job creation, investment. A frantic search for ways to combat Islam is going on.
By all means they try to smother Jihad, wherever it has been launched, and take preventive measures, wherever it is about to come to the surface.
The Arab world is very diverse in its economic status, culture, history and way of thinking. And, yet, none of the socio-economic factors can explain the parallel uprising of the Muslims.
Allah humiliated these heinous dictatorial regimes, which suppressed Islam for decades, Allah demolished their foundations and gave Muslims a chance to build society respecting the laws of Allah.
KC: At some point, Egypt, as the largest and most significant country in the Arab world, became the biggest concern to the West. But, apparently, the democratic scenario is being implemented there widely across the board . Admittedly, Muslim brothers has played an important role in that democratic hustle -and-bustle.
M. Udugov: Indeed, Ikhwanul Muslimin, or the Muslim Brotherhood, is by all means attempting to emphasize their commitment to democratic values. They accepted some females and Coptic Christians into their leadership. What is left to do, in order to prove their tolerance to the West, is to admit a couple of sodomites and a rabbi, as well.
This movement has long been degenerated and degraded itself, but, unfortunately, its supporters are blissfully unaware of this. Recent history provides no lessons for them.
Even if they come to power, we know what the outcome of that would be- look what so-called Democratic Islam has done in Sudan or Gaza.
I very much doubt that the Egyptian Ikhwan can change the established system. On the contrary - they have been trying for a long time to integrate themselves within the existing system. I think they stand a better chance of achieving that goal.
The fact that Egypt geographically occupies a strategically important place with a very large population does not make it a key leader of changes undergoing in the Arab world.
That is how we see it, that is what we count on. However, Allah himself, praise Him the Highest of All, will choose the nation who will establish His law.
It appears that the people of Yemen and Afghanistan are the closest to succeed in that, but it is only our assumption, for it is Allah who knows best.
KC: Well, no wonder Yemen is a major concern to the Americans and NATO. If I am not mistaken, in terms of challenges it poses, Yemen ranks third, just after Afghanistan and Iraq, isn't it?
M. Udugov: I won't be surprised, if Yemen rises to the first place. The Western alliance is seriously concerned about the situation in that country. "NATO Review" has published analysis that recommended changing the tactics in the war with the Islamic world.
Experts advise America to renounce the increase in firepower, to pay more attention to the education of its personnel, i.e., to the preparation of competent military allies and dependable agents in the field.
Carefully collected information about Yemen takes into consideration everything - ranging from insufficient water resources to the contradictions between the North and the South of the country.
KC: Namely, to find the weakest links to use against the Jihad and Mujahideen?
M. Udugov: That's right. The said William Lynn indicated in his latest report on changes in U.S. strategy that the Americans would use more effective, in their opinion, methodology in the global confrontation with Islam.
This strategy includes, for example, special programs of military and economic aid to the West-controlled regimes in the Islamic world, the strengthening of penal structures of the state, etc. The overall aim is to prevent what the Americans call "a crisis", well before it reaches the stage that the deployment of US armed forces becomes necessary.
KC: Will the NATO central command agree on a ground operation in Libya? Distance spraying of bullets, bombs and missiles is not likely to facilitate the establishment of a puppet regime. On the other hand, ground invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq produced devastating outcome to NATO, did it not?
M. Udugov: Well, not quite. For instance, air bombardment was crucial in establishing a loyal regime in Serbia. However, the situation in Muslim countries is somewhat different from European realities, so that bombings on their own will not solve the problem.
In fact, any strategy appears to be a losing one at the moment. In chess, it is called "zugzwang". We sometimes ascribe logic and political expediency to the way of thinking of the Western politicians. And they believe that they adhere to the so-called "real politics". Notwithstanding the decision they take, they are bound to regret it. Allah does not guide the non-believers.
Should Western alliance dare step onto another Muslim land, then, as the practice has shown, it will benefit the Muslims. By this, I understand the return to their root religion, and therefore - to greatness and dignity of the Ummah of Muhammad (pbuh)
In a case of a foreign invasion, all misunderstandings and doubts tend to vanish thus giving the Jihad a crystal-clear purity of form that is revealed to all true followers of the teachings of Allah.
This world - is a trial period. It is built in such a way that God tests some people by using the others. Infidels are tested by the Muslims, Muslims - by infidels. One nation is tested by another.
KC: And finally, what advice and warnings can you convey to our brothers?
M. Udugov: I have no right to dish out recommendations, but from my experience and understanding of the world, I could do nasiha (reminder and instructions - KC)
First of all, I would urge scholars to lead the Islamic uprising. A vast responsibility has been vested with Muslim scholars now as they must warn the Muslims about the false paths and deceptions that await them.
They must constantly remind and explain to the people the true state of worldly affairs.
It is important to remember that it is not the state but their religion that needs to be rescued first.
You must get rid of the fantasies that Sharia could be established peacefully, as is called for by some, even sincere Muslims. It is misleading. Let me reiterate what the knowledgeable ones said - if that were possible, it would have been done by our Prophet (pbuh).
You can not rely on anyone but Allah; you cannot rely on people to rally for the course. These are mere illusions that will soon disappear. Having said that, under certain circumstances, the masses can become a catalyst for spontaneous processes that are not controlled by the authorities.
We cannot believe any leader who would logically explain why there is no point, as they put it, "to go against the rest of the world and that we must make some concessions for now."
Do not enter any political negotiations at the beginning and in the middle of the uprising, until you gain enough power.
Muslim leaders must interpret events, evaluate them, diffuse knowledge among Muslims and formulate goals and objectives. It is vital to bear in mind that political statements always imply consequences.
Democratic despotism tends to impose its values and way of life by force; it tends to profess the necessity of staying under the banner of "peace and freedom ", while the rivers of blood is being spilled. What is more, Democrats deny Islam the same right to peace and freedom as the rest of mankind.
Proponents of democracy claim that if the whole world submits itself to democracy, humanity will live in peace. Islam says that only when Islam is established in the whole world, humanity will live in peace and true freedom of will.
The difference between these two concepts is that one of them is man-made, and the other one is given to people by God.
In conclusion, I would like to remind us of the words that Caliph Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said to the Arabs:
"One who is seeking the greatness outside the Islam, will be humiliated by Allah. We - people chosen by Allah to be glorified through Islam, and if we seek greatness and glory in something else than Islam, then Allah will humiliate us, too".
Translated by: Deimantas Steponavicius