Is there a nuclear difference between the US invasion of Iraq and the US invasion of Ukraine?
What should be considered when answering this question?
True bigotry or national interest?
There was no justification for the US invasion of Iraq.
The US media reported that the deadly weapons case was self-made. A lie was fabricated to justify the invasion of Iraq.
In addition, the UN Security Council did not approve the attack.
Russia did not feel the need to fall into the trap of goodwill.
We hate the United States. It's not a question of justice, it's just a statement of fact.
We once had the same hatred of the Soviet Union.
Russia is the successor to the Soviet Union, and under President Putin's leadership, Russia's intentions are in line with those of the Soviet Union.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, our hatred is over.
Now the target of this hatred is the United States.
This hatred is growing.
The search for possession continued.
The question is whether this hatred is against America or Russia. What is its basis?
True bigotry or national interest? What should be the point of view of a Muslim?
In the twentieth century, when the era of empires came to an end and the world adopted a new political organization in the form of nation-states, nationalism became the basis of collectivism.
Race and geography were considered the foundation of the nation.
This concept gave birth to new political ethics.
"National interest" was considered a moral value. The old values of ethics were abandoned by this concept.
Though the concept of love for the homeland already existed and sacrifice for the homeland was considered a great value.
Homeland and state are two different concepts.
Love of homeland is natural and optional from state.
Religion, which gives the concept of morality, does not accept man-made scales.
It is based on the nature of the Creator and the consciousness of good and evil was placed in it.
Prophets were sent to awaken it. When the divine guidance was completed, the end of prophecy was announced.
What is the famous poem of Allama Iqbal:
The greatest of these fresh gods is the homeland
The shroud that belongs to him is the shroud of religion
God is worshiped. He is obeyed and he is considered as the standard of truth and falsehood.
It is as if he is to be made a god. Moral standards will be determined by divine guidance and not by national interest.
I understand this to mean that if there is a conflict between the national interest and the divine guidance, then the Muslim must in any case give preference to the command which is derived from the divine guidance.
Religion is so sensitive in this regard that even in enmity it would like to violate this principle.
From this point of view, hating is not only a measure of right and wrong in the eyes of religion, but it is a despicable act.
Truth must be the basis of the opinion we have to form.
However, it is a difficult task. It is not easy to choose between the national interest and the truth.
When a government makes a decision, it is in the interest of millions of citizens.
The protection of their lives and property is the responsibility of the government.
There is responsibility. This system of the world is based on the principle of interest, not on the basis of truth and truthfulness.
Especially developing countries which have to rely on big powers in politics and economy.
The question is what to do on such occasions? Who will get the priority? Truth or national interest?
I think that one decision has to be made by the individual and one by the assembly.
In social matters the individual can have a position but he is bound by the collective decisions and he should not stand with the 'Jamaat'.
The situation is different. It is their responsibility to urge the individual and the society to stand on the basis of truth.
Keep the truth in mind when choosing.
It is the duty of the state and the government to abide by international agreements and ethical values in its decisions and actions.
To play its role for the good of the world.
Given the current political system, all decisions must be made in Parliament.
The task of the common man is to accept the decisions that collective order can survive.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine is no different from the US invasion of Iraq. It is an attack on the sovereignty of an independent country and a violation of international principles and treaties. Unfortunately, these agreements were violated by the world powers themselves.
The United States cannot refer to Russia any moral value or agreement that it has violated itself. ۔
Today, the world needs intellectuals like Sartre, Noam Chomsky and Arun Dhatti Rai, who distinguish between the national interest and the truth and support the truth in their knowledge.
I wish such characters could be identified in Muslim societies too who, like Allama Iqbal, could teach how political ethics should be subject to divine guidance.
If there are such people in every society, they can influence their own governments.
That they should not make decisions based on oppression.
This is possible only in democratic societies.
We know that millions of people took to the streets in the United States and Europe to protest the US invasion of Iraq. In Russia, however, this is not possible.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine shows that the mood in the world has not changed.
Man's collective conscience is the last hope if he wakes up.
A global movement of intellectuals who preach justice to their respective states and prevent oppression.
You must be logged in to post a comment.