The myth of a single “Islamic threat”
Among the modern political myths, fabricate architects of the “new world order” and consumed by the naive masses, one of zlovrednaya is the myth of the “unified Islamic fundamentalism” as a “wild obscurantist force”, threatening the civilization of mankind, and especially the “rich North”. The existence of the “Islamic (or fundamentalist) danger” to justify the leaders of NATO, the very existence of this Union. The same argument is one of the most important political and strategic relations between the West and Russia.In the face of this imaginary evil, the West takes Russia’s role zavarovalnica squad. At least insist NATO officials and ambassadors of Washington in the negotiations with the Russians. Actually, things are quite different. This concept is just a smokescreen, a cover for the implementation of the West their real and far more sophisticated, subtle strategic operations, in accordance with the rules of classical strategy, pushing between potential allies in the camp of the competitors to deal with each of them alone.
The Islamic world is far from homogeneous. There are a few geopolitical units, each of which relies on distinct historical, religious, cultural and civilizational trends, conducting independent strategic line both globally and locally. In addition to fundamentalism in Islam, there are many other versions and trends. But more importantly for the concept of “Islamic fundamentalism” is somewhat not just different, but contradictory trends. Not realizing this, we will not be able to adequately understand or sense what is happening today crisis events in Chechnya and Dagestan (also in the North Caucasus and the looming disaster in other areas with the Muslim population on the territory of the Russian Federation), or what is happening in the Islamic world as a whole.
Pole: Wahhabism against the Shia-Sufi Islam
The most active geopolitical poles of the Islamic world are civilizational and political centers.
1) the Important role the Islamic world played by Saudi Arabia, where the movement of Wahhabism is not just very common, but the official ideology of the ruling regime. Wahhabism — is a religious-political movement in Islam, formed in the XVIII century, named after Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab al-Tamim, which is an extremely moralistic and puritanical, extremist form of Sunni Arab, absolutely devoid of hint of any mystical, initiatic dimension.This is Islam, devoid of the spiritual element, the embodiment of moralistic fanaticism and self-contained the letter ”legalism”. In a sense, it is to Wahhabism, the term “hypocrisy” is ideal. Today, Wahhabism is understood to be already specific and pronounced religious idea, and the totality of the ideologies of Islamic origin that preaches extreme intolerance for other faiths and dissent, and justifies their murder.
In addition, in today’s reality, this Saudi Wahhabi pole, coupled with the totalitarian rule of the oil sheiks, is an absolute Atlanticist ally of the West, a reliable Outpost of the United States in the Middle East and more widely throughout the Islamic world.
2) Second, all opposite the first pole, embodied in Iranian Islam, predominantly Shia areas. This category also join the different sects in Sunni Islam that has emphasized the mystical , initiatory orientation. Together, these groups can be called “Shia-Sufi”. This course historically and philosophically and culturally, is the complete antithesis of the Wahhabi version. Islam is a vibrant, visionary, paradoxality. Morality and foreign letter have in it of secondary importance.In the first place is a mystery personal and collective transformational experience, the mystery of the heart knowledge of the difficult road to the center of things. The Pro-Iranian, Shiite-Sufi currents in contemporary Islam geopolitically can collectively be called “Eurasian”, “continental”. They usually have the common denominator of radical hostility to the West and Atlanticism, the sacred hatred of the atheist technocratic material civilization rich North, identified with the “great Shaitan”.
The Holy city of Shiite Islam of Qom (Iran)
It is important to emphasize the absolute incompatibility of these two varieties of Islamic fundamentalism. Indicative of the fact that the Shiite world highest spiritual authority honors the slain Imam Hussein, who died at the hands of the Caliph Yazid. The Wahhabi tradition, for its part, considers this historical character Khalifa Yazid — the highest spiritual authority. Thus, here there is a total religious, psychological, and geopolitical opposition.
3) Another version of Islam (today in its pure form almost destroyed) are various versions of Islamic socialism, most often associated historically with the party “Baas”. This trend was strong in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, South Yemen, and in Egypt and Libya. At the time of Islamic socialism was politically supported by the Soviet Union, but after its collapse, this direction gradually began to lose its influence the face of the steadily growing popularity of various fundamentalist trends. In the future in order to survive, this current is doomed to combination with other Islamic movements.
4) the Fourth trend in the Islamic world is “enlightened Islamism”. It is in fact a complete rejection of the norms of the Islamic tradition in its religious and civilizational dimension, focuses on copying Western models of politics and Economics, is an essentially secular model of Atlanticist wing, entirely Pro-Western and strategically dependent, but at the same time retaining a vestigial ,gift items folk Islam.The most typical examples of such regimes in the Islamic world is Turkey a secular, modern, Pro-American Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco.
These four version of Islam despite its diversity, can be grouped in geopolitical orientation in the following way: potentially, the Eurasian is a Sufi-Shiite line and the residual Arab socialism; Atlanticist — Wahhabism and “enlightened Islam”. So when it comes to the Islamic factor, we must immediately clarify what is actually meant using the classification given by us above.
So, the idea of “unified Islam” is false and pure propaganda move. There is a Eurasian Islam and Islam Atlanticist, Pro-Western and anti-Western, and the criterion of division is not the fact of confession of the religion of Muhammad, and the specificity of the profession (in particular, the opposite of Wahhabism and Sufism); the rules of the secular political regime, but the geopolitical preferences of a particular ideology (in particular, the radical opposition to the capitalist Pro-Western regimes “enlightened Islamism” and the ”Islamic socialism”).
The West supports Atlanticist-oriented Islam and fighting against Islam Eurasian. In respect of such objectively and organically Eurasian powers like Russia the strategy of the West is clear: Russia is necessary to quarrel with a potential ally (Eurasian Islam), and to support all anti-Russian subversive activities “of Atlanticism in Islamic guise.” This formula and are guided by American and NATO strategists, forcing the Russian leadership of those rules of international external and internal political relations that will satisfy the interests of a “new world order”.
As the geopolitical interests of the West are broadcast in Russia by Atlanticist agents of influence (Pro-Western lobby), it is perfectly logical there is apparently contradictory and paradoxical (if not to take into account geopolitics) the attitude of liberals to the Chechen campaign: on the one hand, the liberals helped to fan anti-Islamic sentiments in the Russian Mentone, on the other hand, showed solidarity with the Muslims where it was causing appreciable harm to Russia as a Eurasian axis.
From the patriots it would also be quite logical to follow strictly geopolitical approach, leaving aside all emotional or taste preferences, religious contradictions, likely to overcome the terrible memory of the civil war. But, alas, if the geopolitical consciousness of the West in a practical way relies on hundreds of serious analytical centers, foundations, and intellectual institutions, which subsequently provide the geopolitical projects of the conductors of its policy in other countries (including the Russian liberals and the “young reformers”), the geopolitical consciousness of the national forces of Russia fragmentary, superficial, accidental, and emotionally undeveloped.
The almost universal ignorance of the geopolitical patriots extremely facilitates the implementation of Atlanticist plans and slows down the process of awakening our people and state to the execution of organic and natural Eurasian mission.
(From an article by A. Dugin “Islam against Islam”, 2000)