Recent tensions between Western powers and Iran have again embroiled the region in a diplomatic frenzy, as nations scramble to shield themselves from the fallout of America's renewed confrontation with Iran over its nuclear programme. Iranian military exercises laced with fiery rhetoric emanating from Tehran, and the presence of Western warships to enforce sanctions in the Persian Gulf has caused international panic.

Against the backdrop of Iranian threats to close the Straits of Hormuz, oil prices have spiked and speculation is forever mounting about Israeli and American military strikes against Iran. For instance, the US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta hinted at military action in the event Iran went too far. He said, "We have to make sure we are ready for any situation and have all options on the table. We must keep all capabilities ready in the event those lines are crossed." (Tensions high, US warns Iran not to block shipping, AP Online, January 13 2012). The latest bout of verbal dueling occasionally punctuated with threats of military action has sounded alarms bells as far away as Moscow and Beijing. Speaking at a news conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned about attacking Iran. He said, "I have no doubt that it would pour fuel on a fire which is already smoldering, the hidden smoldering fire of Sunni-Shia confrontation, and beyond that (cause) a chain reaction - I don't know where it would stop...On the chances of whether this catastrophe will happen or not you should ask those who repeatedly talk about this." (Western strike on Iran would be "catastrophe": Russia, Reuters Online, January 18 2012). Li Song, Deputy Director-General of the Department of Arms Control of the Chinese Foreign Ministry said, "Military action would have a disastrous effect on the peace and stability of the Middle East. Once a war takes place in the region, not only will countries in the region be affected and impacted, world energy security and the world economy will suffer a deadly blow." (Iran attack would be 'disastrous', China Daily Online, January 19 2012).

However, beyond the current military buildup, there are gestures from both sides that are seemingly at odds with the warmongers in Washington and Tehran. The American rescue of hijacked Iranian fishermen and Obama's letters to the Iranian leadership suggests that America wants to resolve the issue diplomatically. Commenting on the letter, Ebrahimi, who is the Deputy Chairman of the Majlis's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee said, "In the letter, Obama has mentioned cooperation and negotiation based on the interests of the two countries. He has stated in the letter that they will not take any hostile action against the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is not the first time that Obama has sent a message and letter to the Islamic Republic of Iran. He has repeatedly spoken in a soft tone about the Islamic Republic of Iran, but, in practice, he has not acted accordingly." (Details of Obama's letter to Iran released, Tehran Times Online, Jan 18 2012)The Iranians have also reciprocated with warm overtures of their own and have stated that the US has a right to move its warships in the Persian Gulf. All of this begs the question: Is this a serious crisis that will lead to war or is the crisis manufactured to support ulterior motives?

One cannot help but notice that over the past six years or so America has had ample opportunities to attack Iran's nuclear sites or initiate regime change, but on each occasion America either downplayed the Iranian threat or gave half-hearted support to the Iranian people to topple the regime. Some of these incidents can be summarized as:

1. In 2005, the Bush administration dismissed Israeli fears of a nuclear armed Iran after the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) revised its estimate from 2010 to 2015, the date by when Iran would possess an atomic bomb. Additionally, and more significantly, the NIE claimed that Iran had abandoned plans to weaponize its nuclear program in 2003.

2. In 2007, America's ambivalence toward Iran was again on display when another close ally, Britain, found its naval personnel captives of Iranian forces. American indifference was deliberate, as Washington feared that Britain had engineered the naval fiasco to instigate an attack on Iran.

3. In 2008, America also refused to sell Israel advanced versions of its bunker-buster bombs and dismissed Israel's show of air power over the Mediterranean, which was widely interpreted by many observers as a dry run to attack Iran

4. In 2009, protests in Iran erupted against Ahmadinejad's re-election. The protestors were strongly supported by the European Union, but America's support was cagy at best. America's patchy support was out of step with European support for the Iranian people and underscored America's reluctance to take decisive action against the Iranian regime.

But one may argue that all of this was in the past, and that the US has finally come round to attacking Iran and thereby addressing Israeli concerns. Supporters of this view bring several evidences to justify their stance. For instance they point to the advance weaponry that is being deployed in Israel as well as the GCC countries, and covert actions to sabotage Iran's nuclear programme. For instance the Wall Street Journal revealed that the White House will provide the United Arab Emirates (UAE) with "thousands of advanced ‘bunker-buster' bombs and other munitions, part of a stepped-up U.S. effort to build a regional coalition to counter Iran. Another source mentioned 500 Hellfire air-to-surface missiles in addition to the other munitions. The Wall Street Journal report added: "The Obama administration is trying to build up the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which comprises Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, U.A.E. and Kuwait, as a unified counterweight to Iran. The newspaper reminded its readers of a $67 billion arms deal initiated by the White House with Saudi Arabia in 2010 to supply the second nation with 84 F-15 fighter jets and 2,000-pound bunker-busting bombs, 72 Black Hawk and 70 Apache Longbow attack helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-2 and other missiles, and warships. The Wall Street Journal also reported that the U.S. Defence Department plans to supply Stinger missiles and medium-range air-to-air missiles to Oman. (US Plans Bomb Sales in Gulf to Counter Iran, Wall Street Journal, November 11, 2011). The news media is rife of reports regarding Israeli covert actions that include a campaign of assassinations, bombings, cyber attacks and defections to weaken the Iranian regime and to halt the country's attempts to develop nuclear capabilities.

However, by deploying advanced weaponry in Israel, arming GCC countries and conducting clandestine activities against in Iran does not mean that the intended US target is Iran. The US can easily point the weaponry elsewhere.

Furthermore, the most important question which observers forget to ask is why the US would risk further instability in the region and attack Iran.

It should be noted that Iran has played a pivotal role to help entrench US hegemony in the region. These are:

1. Iran has provided stability in Iraq through the governing Shia leadership much of it was developed and nurtured under Tehran's tutelage.

2. Tehran has also provided invaluable support to American forces to contain the Afghan Pushtun resistance from spreading westwards.

3. Iran continues to buttress Assad's regime in Syria by providing military support as well as soliciting support from movements and countries across the region.

4. America has adroitly exploited the Iranian threat to bolster its military agreements with Israel and GCC countries. Hence, Iran is a pillar of US stability in Middle East, and the US has often regarded Iran as the leader of the Shia crescent stretching from Lebanon to Yemen, and act as her watchman over the Middle East's hydro-carbon reserves.

5. America has exploited Iran's nuclear programme to justify its missile shield for allies in Europe, the Middle East and parts of Asia.

So by attacking Iran the US will only undermine her interests in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East. Simply put, America has too much to lose. Additionally, the high price of oil that would naturally ensue from such a conflict would exacerbate the US economy and hamper the miniscule growth that the US is currently experiencing. Obama cannot afford to go war, as his re-election depends on the US economy generating more jobs for the unemployed.

The reason behind the imposition of sanctions and clandestine operations in Iran is to assuage Israeli security concerns, and secure much needed Jewish votes for the Obama administration ahead of the US general elections in November 2012. America is fully aware that this is the maximum pressure it can apply on Iran without toppling the Iranian regime and impacting America's regional hegemony.

As for the Jewish state, it still harbours ambitions to hoodwink America into a military confrontation with Iran. Israel's defence minister Ehud Barak is said to have told General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, that Israel will give the US no more than 12 hours notice before it ventures to demolish Iran's nuclear installations. As a result the US postponed its military exercise with Israel (US miffed as Israel hints at unilateral strike on Iran N-sites, Times of India, January 23 2012). America is treading carefully with Israel, and trying to ensure that it does not launch any military strikes. The Europeans on the other hand are keen to support Israel covertly, hoping that any confrontation with Iran would drag America into another war that it cannot afford and would eventually bleed America to death. Nonetheless, the European effort is timid, as Europe is consumed with the economic crisis. All of this means that unless Israel gets support from Europe in particularly the GCC countries that are loyal to Britain, the chance of a military strike is of diminutive proportions.

This then leaves the unanswered question of the timing of the tensions coupled with the rapid buildup of arms. The tensions between Iran and America were accentuated in response to the IAEA report, and serve two objectives. First, America sought to address Israeli concerns by demonstrating its seriousness to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions by enforcing sanctions and talking tough. Second, America is preparing to intervene in Syria and the buildup of weapons is in part to address this eventuality. The timing of the intervention will depend on how quickly the US can get the Syrian opposition united to take over from Assad's regime. Russia is acutely aware of American intentions to invade Syria and has warned America that it would not support a UN resolution authorizing force.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, "If some intend to use force at all cost ... we can hardly prevent that from happening. But let them do it at their own initiative on their own conscience, they won't get any authorization from the U.N. Security Council." (Russia warns against military action against Syria, rejects criticism of munitions delivery, Washington Post Online, January 18 2012). To dissuade the US, Russia has sent shipment of weapons to Syria, signed a military jet deal worth $550 million and stationed some of naval ships in Syria.
The other reason for flooding the region with arms is that America is preparing for an eventual war with major powers such as Russia, China and Europe over the control of the oil and gas supplies of the Middle East. She is also preparing for the return of the Caliphate and will use her agents to delay the unification of Muslim countries in the region.

From day one of taking power, traitor Hasina and the ruling regime has been arresting members and activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir. Then they banned the party. After that they arrested hundreds of party members and activists. And now they are once again going house to house, arresting members and activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir. As part of that they arrested one of the top cardiologists in the country, Dr Gulam Haider Rasul for his affiliation with the party on 24 January, 2012 and yesterday (25 January, 2012) they have taken him in remand for 7 days. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, from day one of taking power the Hasina government plotted against the Muslim Army of Bangladesh. So they massacred the bright officers in Pilkhana. Thereafter Hasina immediately dismissed the sincere officers who spoke against the government's collaboration with India in the massacre. Then she carried on, picking out and dismissing the sincere officers. Now she has embarked upon executing a policy of whole sale purge of the army of all officers who stand on the side of Islam, and the country's sovereignty and security. She does this while she turns a blind eye to the killing and torturing of the people of this country by Indian BSF. Hasina and the ruling regime's repression against Hizb ut-Tahrir and the Muslim Army of Bangladesh has one aim, which is to remove the obstacles to implementing the American design for this region and facilitate US-Indian strategic partnership. One of the primary aims of this evil strategic partnership is to prevent the return of the Khilafah "Caliphate".

We in Hizb ut-Tahrir say that these repressive measures of Hasina are nothing but a sign of her insanity, which is doing the same action over and over again expecting different results. All the arrests, harassment and torture till now has failed to deter Hizb ut-Tahrir from standing up for the cause of Allah ((SWT) and His Messenger (SAW), for the cause of Islam and the Muslims. All killings, abductions, arrests, and dismissals till now failed to subdue the spirit of the sincere officers in the Muslim Army of Bangladesh. So what makes Hasina repeat the same actions expecting that she will achieve a different result? Let Sheikh Hasina know that members and activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir are the sons of Hamza (RA) and Hussein (RA). Let her know that the sincere officers in the Muslim Army are the sons of Khalid bin Walid (RA) and Salah Uddin Ayubi, may Allah (SWT) have mercy on him. Therefore her actions are destined to fail and the establishment of the Khilafah "Caliphate" is imminent due to the work of the sincere sons of the Ummah, by the Will of Allah (SWT). Let her take lessons from her forefathers, Abu Jahl, Abu Lahab and others who all faced nothing except doom.

قُلْ هَلْ نُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِالأَخْسَرِينَ أَعْمَالاً}الكهف: 103}

الَّذِينَ ضَلَّ سَعْيُهُمْ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَهُمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ يُحْسِنُونَ صُنْعًا }الكهف: 104}

أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِآيَاتِ رَبِّهِمْ وَلِقَائِهِ فَحَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فَلاَ نُقِيمُ لَهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَزْنًا }الكهف: 105}

Say (O Muhammad): "Shall We tell you the greatest losers in respect of (their) deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their deeds. They are those who deny the Ayat of their Lord and the Meeting with Him. So their works are in vain, and on the Day of Resurrection, We shall give no weight for them." [TMQ Al-Kahf: 103-105]

Hizb ut-Tahrir also reminds the members of the security and intelligence agencies of their duty to stand by the sincere sons of the Ummah and not to follow the directives of the treacherous rulers. Otherwise you will lose in this dunya when the Khilafah "Caliphate", which is about to return soon insha'Allah, will account and punish you. And in the Hereafter you will be with the treacherous rulers.

يَوْمَ تُقَلَّبُ وُجُوهُهُمْ فِي النَّارِ يَقُولُونَ يَا لَيْتَنَا أَطَعْنَا اللَّهَ وَأَطَعْنَا الرَّسُولَ}الأحزاب: 66}

وَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا إِنَّا أَطَعْنَا سَادَتَنَا وَكُبَرَاءَنَا فَأَضَلُّونَا السَّبِيلَ }الأحزاب: 67}

رَبَّنَا آتِهِمْ ضِعْفَيْنِ مِنْ الْعَذَابِ وَالْعَنْهُمْ لَعْنًا كَبِيرًا }الأحزاب: 68}

On the Day their faces will be turned upside down in the fire, they will say: "Oh, would that we had obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger." And they will say: "Our Lord! Verily we obeyed our chiefs and our great ones, and they misled us from the (Right) path. "Our Lord! Give them double penalty and curse them with a very mighty curse!" [TMQ Al-Ahzab: 66-68]

Reuters reported that "an unnamed senior security official said that Pakistan expects to re-open supply routes to Nato forces in Afghanistan but will impose tariffs." It is less than two months since the brutal killings of 24 Pakistani soldiers by US forces, yet the agents amongst the military and political leaderships of Pakistan have started a media campaign to reopen the Nato supply line. This means that a life of a Muslim soldier is not worth more than the suspension of a supply-line for just two and half days! It is worth mentioning that this time round, the US didn't even care to apologize for her gruesome act as she did earlier in a similar incident. And not only that, the US has restarted its notorious drone operations with renewed vigour, killing many in the last few weeks.

Reuters also reported from a security official, that "The tariffs will cover everything from the port to security to roads, which after all belong to Pakistan".

What a joke! The government is discussing imposition of tariffs when US is pulling out of Afghanistan and that too after 10 brutal years! What is the point of putting tariffs now, when the game is over? If a Pakistani trader brings anything, he is slapped with GST, import duties and God-knows-what. But these agents rulers not only gave our land routes and air space to a belligerent Kafir, they gave it for free! How can Kayani and Pasha now claim to be sincere?! The Ummah is not naive. The Ummah knows that Kayani, who was the ISI chief during the Red Mosque massacre, is a bigger American stooge than Musharraf. He has perpetrated atrocities which even Musharraf did not dare to do. All FATA operations took place under the watchful eyes of the cunning and conniving Kayani. It was he who took the media on board to build public opinion for the killings of thousands and the displacement of millions of Muslims in the Tribal belt. And now when the US has established check-posts throughout the Tribal belt with the mercenary help of the few generals, her objective of controlling FATA and forcing Kufr laws and Western culture, will be realized under the deceptive notion of "mainstreaming the Tribal region" or better yet "abolishing the FCR and creating a new province", jargon. This would allow the much needed US control over the region, which has been a no-go area since the British Raj. Hence, now American oil and gas companies could easily pipeline Central Asian hydrocarbons down to the Arabian Sea for lucrative profits. It was Kayani and Pasha who provided Muslim blood and money to fulfill this American objective by witch-hunting the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, the sudden creation of which has always been a question mark.

Kayani understands that reopening the Nato supply line is always going to be an unpopular proposition. This is why he wants the Parliament to take the lead, which would help camouflage his treachery. The Parliamentary Committee on National Defense is reviewing the role of Pakistan in "War on Terror" as well as Pakistan's relationship with Nato and the US. It is expected, in the near future, that the Parliament will give a clean chit with a few caveats, which would include levying some taxes to cool off the public emotions. But unfortunately, the media as well as the religious parties are mute on a very important matter i.e. how can a parliament legislate in a matter which has already been decided by Allah (SWT)? It is clear in Shari'ah that Muslims cannot support a Herbi (enemy) country to kill other Muslims. Isn't this a clear violation of the so-called Islamic constitution of Pakistan which states that laws cannot be legislated against Islam?! It is well known that that the imperialists who added few "Islamic" articles within the Pakistani constitution simply to keep the simple and naive Islamists quiet. And whenever there is a need to violate these articles of the constitution they do it with complete ease. Currently there are hundreds, if not thousands of laws, which are in complete conflict with Islamic injections but still a few political parties vociferously claim that the Pakistani State is an Islamic State . Had Pakistan been an Islamic state there would not have been even a question of Nato supply line, let alone fighting our own Muslim brothers under the guise of "War on Terror".

Today, another news item which has shocked the Pakistani public whose authenticity and correctness still needs to be further ascertained, regarding Dr. Aafiya Siddiqui. Aafiya Siddiqui is a Muslim scientist who has been jailed for 86 years in US prison after being kidnapped from Pakistan. She is jailed for crimes which she has not committed. According to the news item she was raped in the US prison and now she is pregnant. She is also suffering from cancer and Pakistani embassy has not done anything in this regard. This is the disgusting and shameful face of the current agent rulers. On the one hand US is killing, raping and humiliating Muslims, whilst the nexus of Kayani, Pasha, Zardari and Gillani are itching to reopen the lifeline of the Nato crusaders in Afghanistan. O sincere officers of the Pak Army! Doesn't this make your blood boil? How can you be a silent spectator? What else are you waiting for? Mobilize and uproot these military and political traitors and establish the KHILAFAH by giving Nusrah to Hizb ut-Tahrir. It would be the KHILAFAH, which would avenge Dr. Aafiya and thousands of other Muslim women, as well as the massacres of Iraq and Afghanistan by conducting an organized Jihad through the Khilafah "Caliphate"'s armies. This is the only way forward.

Naveed Butt
The Official Spokesman of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Pakistan

Headlines:

• Islam Spreading in Britain
• IMF Chief Economist Warns Possible ‘Dangerous Downward Spiral' in World
• Turkey Denounces French Genocide bill
• US Official Meets Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood
• GCC Follows Saudi Arabia and Pulls its Observers Out of Syria

Details:

Islam Spreading in Britain:

The number of Britons choosing to become Muslims has nearly doubled in the past decade, according to one of the most comprehensive attempts to estimate how many people have embraced Islam. Following the global spread of violent Islamism, British Muslims have faced more scrutiny, criticism and analysis than any other religious community. Yet, despite the often negative portrayal of Islam, thousands of Britons are adopting the religion every year. Estimating the number of converts living in Britain has always been difficult because census data does not differentiate between whether a religious person has adopted a new faith or was born into it. Previous estimates have placed the number of Muslim converts in the UK at between 14,000 and 25,000. But a new study by the inter-faith think-tank Faith Matters suggests the real figure could be as high as 100,000, with as many as 5,000 new conversions nationwide each year. The figures are comparable with studies in Germany and France which found that there were around 4,000 conversions a year.

IMF Chief Economist Warns Possible ‘Dangerous Downward Spiral' in World:

The International Monetary Fund's chief economist warned Tuesday of the potential for a "very dangerous downward spiral" if fiscal consolidation and bank deleveraging continue in major economies without any resolution to the European debt crisis. At a briefing on the quarterly update of the IMF's World Economic Outlook, Olivier Blanchard, economic counsellor and director of the Research Department, stressed the need to hold off on debt cuts in the short term to allow the European and world economies to stabilize. The WEO slashed the IMF's previous forecast for world growth and for the euro zone -- by seven-tenths and 1.6 percentage points, respectively -- and the accompanying Global Financial Stability Report and Fiscal Monitor cautioned against moving too fast with adjustment, although credible medium-term debt reduction plans are needed. Blanchard said doubts about fiscal sustainability are leading to high yields on sovereign bonds, and in turn doubts about bank solvency, which has led governments and banks to try to reassure markets by consolidating further, and by deleveraging and tightening credit. "But both actions have decreased growth leading to a very dangerous downward spiral," Blanchard told reporters. "Now, if this downward spiral is not contained it could lead to much worse outcomes, be it disorderly default or euro exit, with then major spillovers first to rest of euro area and then to rest of the world," he warned.

Turkey Denounces French Genocide Bill:

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday blasted France over a controversial genocide bill passed by the French Senate earlier this week, and warned that the relations between the two nations would be damaged permanently if the bill becomes law. The development came a day after the French Senate ignored Turkey's strong objections and approved a bill making it a crime to deny officially recognized genocides including the World War I-era mass killings of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire. Addressing members of his AK Party in the Parliament on Tuesday, Erdogan denounced the French bill as racist and a "massacre of freedom of thought," and said: "We have not lost our hope yet that this mistake can be corrected." Noting that the bill was aimed at gaining "votes through anti-Turkishness," Erdogan said his government intends to impose "sanctions step by step with certainty and without hesitation" against France if the bill is signed into law by the French President.

The legislation stipulates a year in jail and a fine of EUR 45,000 on anyone in France denying genocide. It will now be sent to President Nicolas Sarkozi for signing it into law, as Lower House of the Parliament, the National Assembly, had passed the measure in December.

US Official Meets Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood:

The number two official in the U.S. State Department met with a leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood on Wednesday but chose not to see a more hardline Islamist group that has also fared well in Egypt's first free legislative vote in decades. Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns met Mohamed Morsi, the head of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), in Washington's highest level outreach to the Islamist group as part of a series of meetings with Egyptian political figures in Cairo, the State Department said."From our perspective it was an opportunity to hear from them and to reinforce our expectation that all the major parties will support human rights, tolerance, rights of women and will also uphold Egypt's existing international obligations," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said. Burns, the principal deputy to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is the highest-level U.S. official to meet with Muslim Brotherhood officials since Washington tweaked a long-standing ban on formal contacts with the Islamist group earlier this year. Burns' talks with Brotherhood representatives follows Washington's decision last year to drop a ban on formal meetings with the group in recognition of its political role in Egypt's democratic transformation. The shift, which looked likely to upset Israel and its U.S. supporters, was first reported by Reuters in June.

GCC Follows Saudi Arabia and Pulls its Observers Out of Syria:

The Gulf Cooperation Council said it had decided "to follow Saudi Arabia's decision to pull out its observers from the Arab League mission in Syria". It called on "members of the UN Security Council... to take all needed measures to press Syria to implement the Arab League decisions and the Arab initiative on Syria." The Gulf states accounted for 54 of the 165 monitors in the Arab League mission to Syria, a GCC official said. Saudi Arabia decided on Sunday to pull out its observers. The Arab League said it had requested a meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to present its proposals on resolving the crisis and seek support from the Security Council. The request was issued by the league's secretary general Nabil Al Arabi and Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, deputy secretary general Ahmad bin Helli told AFP. Meanwhile, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said: "Enough of the Arab solutions from now," accusing the group of "plotting" to internationalise the crisis and taking decisions while "knowing that they will be rejected" by Syria. His remarks came after the bloc called on Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to hand over power to his deputy and clear the way for a unity government within two months. "We do not want Arab solutions. We said that two days ago when we refused the initiative and when the ministers' council decided to turn to the Security Council," Mr Muallem said. "We categorically refused (this proposal)."