In Brief...
World News Review

Contributors: Jerold Aust, Cecil Maranville, Melvin Rhodes and John Ross Schroeder

• Moqtada al-Sadr—Revolutionary or Puppet?
• United States vs. Syria
• British-American Special Relationship Suffers Loss
• The EU: Still an Economic dwarf?
• Ongoing Troubles in Iraq

Moqtada al-Sadr—Revolutionary or Puppet?

Is Moqtada al-Sadr a genuine Shia religious leader, guiding the righteous anger of thousands of young Iraqis in opposition to the coalition occupation of their country? Or is he a self-important rebel, either taking direct orders from Iranian mullahs or being adroitly manipulated by them?

Al-Sadr's name is gaining recognition worldwide with the recent violent actions of his "Mahdi Army" against coalition forces, but he was little known outside Iraq until recently. The name "Mahdi" has double significance. It links al-Sadr's objectives with that of the army of Mohammed Ahmed bin Abdullah of the late 19th century in Sudan. Bin Abdullah, a boat builder on the Nile by trade, changed his name to el Mahdi ("the guided one"), and led an uprising against the British occupation forces in Sudan in the 1880s.

Some Shia traditions teach that Mohammed, the founder of Islam, had a vision of a mahdi who would arise at a time when Muslims around the world were oppressed. The mahdi, says the tradition, would unite all Muslims to throw off their oppressors, thereby ushering in an age of peace and security—a sort of "Muslim messiah."

Perhaps al-Sadr sees himself as driving the coalition from Iraq and even as the prophesied Muslim "savior."

But is this young man truly a religious leader?

His only claim to "religious authority" is his father, Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, who was selected by Saddam Hussein to lead the main center for Shia instruction in Iraq. Even Al Jazeera reports that he lacks the religious education and degrees that Shia doctrine requires for him to qualify as a cleric ("Muqtada al-Sadr—a Profile," April 5, 2004). So he is a fraud in that regard.

Hussein's secret police are believed to have later murdered the senior al-Sadr, along with other members of his family, when he became "too popular." This makes the fact that al-Sadr now opposes the coalition that toppled those who killed his father all the stranger. Equally strange is the fact that the Mahdi Army fights alongside former Baathist loyalists.

Numerous reports describe his "army" as a group of unemployed, angry young men, who—and this is confirmed by al-Sadr himself—fight for Hezbollah and Hamas. Hezbollah is the radical Muslim terrorist group fighting Israel from Lebanon. Hamas is its twin, fighting Israel from Palestinian territories. Both are financed by Iran.

Iran, by the way, also finances about 90 percent of the financial needs of Yasir Arafat's Fatah party, replacing the support Saddam Hussein's Iraq used to give (World Tribune.com, Jan. 29, 2004). Iran is clearly putting forth great effort to promote radical Islamic interests in the region.

Respected Middle East authority Michael Ledeen, writing in The Wall Street Journal of April 16, 2004 (online edition), reports that al-Sadr recently visited Iran, where he met with the nation's number 2 man in power, the head of intelligence for Iran's Revolutionary Guards, and the Iranian general in charge of Iraqi affairs.

Ledeen also cites an Italian intelligence service (Sismi) report, prepared before the current violence, that warned of precisely what is taking place, a series of attacks by Saddam loyalists and Shiite revolts throughout Iraq. Ledeen quoted Sismi: "The strategic goal of this revolt [is] the establishment of an Islamic government of Khomeinist inspiration."

Two Arab newspapers based in London, Al-Hayat and Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, documented in early April the fact that hundreds of Iranian intelligence agents were sent into Iraq through the north before Saddam fell. Even greater numbers poured over a virtually open border after his regime fell. They went to Najaf and Karbala, pretending to be religious students or journalists. Are they part of this "popular uprising" that is actually a calculated attempt to seize control of Iraq?

What is Iran's interest in Iraq? A democracy in that country would surely encourage the already pro-democracy elements in Iran and might well lead to an overthrow of the mullahs. Whether al-Sadr fights for himself, as well as for his Iranian sponsors, is immaterial. His battle is a battle for an Islamic state, governed by sharia law.

Radical Islamists fear any reduction of their strength and of their ultimate objective in the Mideast: to free Israel from control by "infidels." See our booklet The Middle East in Bible Prophecy for the rest of the story—what Bible prophecy shows will ultimately happen with this high-stakes struggle.

There are powerful spirits of selfishness and self-interest at work in the Mideast that are going unnoticed or underreported by much of the world. Driven by an anti-American bias that splashes over the British and other coalition members, most journalists seem bent on painting al-Sadr as a popular cleric with a righteous cause.

[ back to top ]

United States vs. Syria

In a related development, Syria is doing little to stop a steady flow of Sunni insurgents into western Iraq. The American forces in Iraq are fully engaged in countering the infiltration of these al-Qaeda allies, who make their way from the border into Ramadi and Fallujah, and eventually all the way to Baghdad. U.S. forces have killed Syrian security personnel, as well, in fighting that shows Syria's reputed cooperation with coalition forces to be a lie. Not for religious reasons, but purely to preserve himself in power, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is trying to have it both ways—giving tacit support to a free Iraq, at the same time as aiding any forces that will oppose the coalition.

The fighting along the Iraqi-Syrian border has cost at least five American lives, not to mention the huge additional cost burden to maintain surveillance and support battle lines in the wilderness area.

Wars seem to turn on the slightest of circumstances, sometimes. By all rights, the American-led coalition should defeat the al-Sadrs, the al-Qaeda allies and the self-seeking despots. But is it God's will to bless the good intentions to free Iraq? Time will tell. But at some point, America's economic and military might will fail her.

Prophecy shows that only Jesus Christ, when present on the earth as its conquering King, will subdue insurgents for all time. Interestingly, in the context of one prophecy of that event, God tells what it takes to truly bring peace: "'Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,' says the LORD of hosts" (Zechariah 4:6).

[ back to top ]

British-American Special Relationship Suffers Loss

It was extremely hot and humid—the hottest time of the year, immediately prior to the coming of the rainy season. We were standing under the tree talking, desperate for some shade.

The location was a small farm just outside Accra, the capital of Ghana. The subsistence farmer and his wife were present as well as a visitor from the United States and me.

It was the farmer who spoke.

"I was shocked," he said, "to hear that Alistair Cooke had died. We will miss him greatly."

At 95, Alistair Cooke still presented a weekly 15-minute radio program Letter From America. It was the longest running radio program in history—it began in 1946 and continued until the end of March this year, less than a month before his death. Broadcast around the world on the BBC World Service, Mr. Cooke's voice was familiar to hundreds of millions. More importantly, he helped the world understand America.

At a time when America is increasingly misunderstood and frequently the odd man out in world affairs, Alistair Cooke is needed now more than ever.

The British newsmagazine The Economist had a full-page obituary of Mr. Cooke in their issue of April 3. The obituary began with the following words: "For as long as anyone can remember, Alistair Cooke was the perfect embodiment of the special relationship... For more than half a century he formed a solid, though urbane, one-man bridge between the two cultures," referring to Britain, where he was born, and America where he lived from the time of the Great Depression until his death.

He had actually gone to the United States to be a drama critic, but soon discovered that America itself was "far more gripping and dramatic than anything I had ever seen" (ibid.). Becoming a U.S. citizen in 1941 and starting his weekly radio broadcast immediately after World War II, Mr. Cooke's experience of America and his coverage of it to the world coincided with America's period of global preeminence.

The Economist's article ends with a sobering reference to rising concerns in the United Kingdom about U.S. foreign policy and especially the conduct of the Iraqi war: "At Mr. Cooke's death, the special relationship had never needed him more."

[ back to top ]

The EU: Still an Economic Dwarf?

In late March Süddeutsche Zeitung reported from Munich, Germany, that although EU expansion is imminent, "the EU appears above all despondent. This stands in sharp contrast to the self-confidence with which the EU proclaimed at the beginning of the millennium its intention of overtaking the U.S. as strongest in the economic area. The giant EU construction must become strong, politically, but above all economically."

The fact is that economic growth in the European Union as a whole is averaging 0.6 percent compared with 3.6 percent in the United States. These figures were published by The Wall Street Journal Europe (March 25). The Financial Times adds, "On issues from innovation to employment, the transatlantic gap has either remained or widened" (March 25). Plainly the EU has fallen well short of the target of matching American economic strides any time in the near future. Most media observers, whether liberal or conservative, judge Europe to be an economic dwarf compared to America—and that was the exact phrase The Wall Street Journal used.

Others sources are more positive in their outlook—especially about the future of the EU. British current affairs author Robert Harvey writes: "The European Union as a whole has an economy comparable to that of the United States, and is steadily progressing towards greater integration. But in terms of growth, cutting-edge technology and most key economic indicators, it continues to lag behind, although this state of affairs may not continue indefinitely" (Global Disorder, 2003, pp. 16-17).

Also take note of Bryn Mawr College professor emeritus Richard Du Boff's assessment: "The United States faces a formidable rival—the EU, its equal in production and trade. The EU is also an emerging political entity, anchored by France and Germany and bent on greater competition with the United States despite the mismatch in military power" (Monthly Review, December 2003).

Yet while Britain has generally kept pace with America, simultaneously Germany has fallen into the economic doldrums. There "more than 41,000 small to medium-sized companies went bust last year, an average of 110 per day." Also "great metropolises like Berlin are quite literally, bankrupt to the tune of billions" (The Scotsman, April 3).

One always worries about German angst when things are going badly economically. We have not yet returned to the historic days of the Weimar Republic. Nonetheless, we should remember that mass unemployment combined with runaway inflation helped produce Adolf Hitler.

Scenes of uncollected rubbish and long bus lines, normally associated with the Britain of the '70s, are beginning to appear in certain German cities. We should all keep an eye on the German economy—keeping in mind the alternative possibility that an unprecedented German economic reversal could happen as well.

[ back to top ]

Ongoing Troubles in Iraq

How does the United States wisely extract itself from Iraq without "cutting and running"? And is it possible to democratize a people so used to dictators and demagogues?

In October 1993 the United States left a lingering legacy in Mogadishu, Somalia, when they sent elite American soldiers into the heart of the city to abduct top lieutenants of the warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid. America lost 18 servicemen, and more than 500 Somalis died. That event has had a cautionary influence on American foreign policy. Indeed, recent uprisings in Iraq appear to be a throwback to what happened in Somalia: Fiercely resist the infidel intruders and they will leave the country.

President Bush has repeatedly said the U.S.-led coalition will not "cut and run" but will finish the job. Perhaps that's the only thing that can be done. Can a people so acculturated to demagoguery be democratized? Possibly. But at what price? There aren't that many options available.

The capture of Saddam Hussein has helped remove the fear of the return of his despotic rule. A contained Saddam helps the majority of Iraqis entertain a form of democracy. They want freedom like all peoples; and democracy, despite all its warts and bumps, allows for such freedom.

Time is of the essence, as are the successes of a new Iraqi democratic form of government. Early democratic successes would mean faster acceptance. But the nagging factors of time and American casualties play a dominant role on the American psyche. Are Americans willing to sacrifice their youth for the possible peaceful returns from an Iraqi democratic government? And will Europe get involved in the Iraqi process?

Ongoing troubles can be expected in Iraq and from its neighbors. The Bible says that Middle Eastern troubles will continue and only God will bring lasting peace to the Middle East.

[ back to top ]

 

[ Return to Table of Contents ] [ View next article ]