- Iran is up for a rude awakening as no Islamic country including Pakistan will come to its aid as Israel retaliates.
- Despite the religious ideal of unity, the Muslim world is politically fragmented into various nation-states, each with its government, interests, and alliances.
- These divisions were solidified during the colonial period and have persisted in modern geopolitics.
- The ghost of several geopolitical, religious, and historical pasts will now come into play and Iran will suffer the ignominy of being attacked by the Jewish State.
The concept of the Islamic Ummah refers to the global community of Muslims, bound together by their shared faith in Islam. Historically, the idea of the Ummah has been rooted in the Qur’an and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. It emphasizes unity, solidarity, and the collective welfare of all Muslims, transcending national, ethnic, and cultural boundaries. However, it seems Iran is going to learn the truth the hard way.
The modern notion of the Islamic Ummah[1] often faces scrutiny, particularly when juxtaposed with the political realities and divisions among Muslim-majority countries and the Israel-Iran conflict underscores the complexity of the myth of the Islamic Ummah, highlighting the divergence between the ideal of Muslim unity and the reality of political, sectarian, and strategic divisions within the Muslim world and the best example was the First Gulf War.
On 2 August 1990[2], the first Gulf War started and Iraq was pummeled by a collation of 42 countries which included NATO and Muslim-majority countries Egypt and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Syria, Morocco, Kuwait, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain. Most of these countries are predominately Sunni Muslims but that did not deter them from attacking Iraq which was ruled by Saddam Hussain, a Sunni Muslim.
Despite the religious ideal of unity, the Muslim world is politically fragmented into various nation-states, each with its government, interests, and alliances. These divisions were solidified during the colonial period and have persisted in modern geopolitics. Nationalism often supersedes the idea of a unified Islamic world.
Within Islam, there are deep sectarian divisions, most notably between Sunni and Shia Muslims. These theological differences have been at the root of various conflicts in the Muslim world, from Iraq and Syria to Yemen. These tensions challenge the ideal of a united Ummah.
The Muslim world encompasses a vast array of ethnicities, languages, and cultural practices, from Arabs and Persians to South Asians, Africans, and Southeast Asians. These diverse identities often result in different interpretations of Islam, further complicating the idea of a single, homogenous Ummah.
However, Muslim-majority countries often pursue their own strategic and economic interests, which can conflict with one another. Examples include the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran or the differing foreign policies of Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan. These national interests often take precedence over any pan-Islamic unity.
Even during the early Islamic Caliphates (the Rashidun, Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid that once ran concurrently and Ottoman empires), the idea of the Ummah was more idealistic than practical. Political power struggles, dynastic conflicts, and regional interests often undermined the notion of a unified Islamic world.
Ideal vs. Reality
However, the reality of the Muslim world is far more complex. While religious ties may unite Muslims spiritually, the political, sectarian, and cultural factors often divide them in practice. Thus, the notion of a unified, politically cohesive Islamic Ummah is often regarded as more myth than reality in the modern world, though it continues to hold deep symbolic and religious significance.
Saudi Arabia in the 1960s with all its oil money tried to be the leader of the Muslim world. In that process, it exported Wahhabism[3] which later became its one bane in the making. However, Iran was a liberal society until Ayatollah Khomeini took charge and changed the very fabric of Iran’s society. Post-revolution, Ayatollah to become the leader of the faithful and Iran wanted to be the leader of the faithful. However, this was resisted by other Muslim countries in this region.
Saudi Arabia however in the last ten years has slowly corrected its course and is now moving towards a pluralistic society while retaining its original values. But that has not been the case with Iran because the Ayatollah simply could not give up power. The fact of the matter is, Iran is still a civilization and the people are aspirational and want progress.
Iran is up for a rude awakening as no Islamic country including Pakistan will come to its aid as Israel retaliates. The ghost of several geopolitical, religious, and historical pasts will now come into play and Iran will suffer the ignominy of being attacked by the Jewish State. It is also simply the best opportunity for Israel and the United States to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. If that happens Iran will be toothless meanwhile its proxies Hamas and Hezbollah stand dismembered.
Also, many Islamic countries, especially those in the Gulf (such as the UAE, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia), have strong ties with the United States, and now share a close relationship with Israel. These countries rely on U.S. military support and are unlikely to jeopardize those relationships by siding with Iran.
But the most important factor is that several Arab countries (UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan) have normalized diplomatic and economic relations with Israel through the Abraham Accords. These countries are unlikely to support Iran in a conflict with Israel, as they have increasingly aligned with Israel in countering what they perceive as Iran’s destabilizing influence in the region.
Many Muslim-majority countries prioritize their national interests, security, and economic stability over religious solidarity. Even though Iran may position itself as a defender of Palestinian rights and anti-Israeli sentiment, these countries often prioritize their economic and political alliances over religious or ideological concerns.
Conclusion
In Islamic tradition, the phrase “the world was in darkness until 1400 years ago” refers to the period before the advent of Islam and the revelation of the Qur’an to the Prophet Muhammad around 610 CE (approximately 1400 years ago). This period is often called Jahiliyyah[4], which means the “Age of Ignorance.” It represents a time before the guidance of Islam was revealed to humanity, where, according to Islamic teachings, people were in spiritual and moral ignorance.
However, this tradition is now viewed more honoured in the breach than the observance. Mohamad Rasjidi who was a Minister of Religious Affairs of Indonesia said, “The Quran was revealed almost fourteen hundred years ago and the traditions concerning the prophet who lived that long ago, exclusively in the desert society, cannot serve as explicit guides for every situation which might arise centuries later and especially in the complex societies of the present days”.
In Saudi Arabia, the teachings of the Qur’an are now not literal in a sense but more of a spiritual guide involving religious interpretation, political pragmatism, and social evolution. While Saudi Arabia is known for its conservative application of Islamic law (Sharia) and its claim to be the custodian of Islam’s holiest sites (Mecca and Medina), its policies do not always reflect a strict, literal interpretation of the Qur’an.
Saudi Arabia has launched a massive economic and social reform program called Vision 2030. This initiative aims to modernize the country, diversify its economy away from oil, and reduce the influence of hardline religious authorities. Iran is right now involved in too many conflicts it can handle and is not in a position to stretch its security forces and its military due to the fear of internal resurrection.
Clearly, Iran has failed to meet the demands of modern governance and be part of globalization. In its quest for strict religious enforcement and domination of the global Ummah, Iran has failed to exercise flexibility and pragmatism in areas where a literal interpretation of the Qur’an might conflict with political, economic, or diplomatic objectives.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which consists of 57 member states, has not provided strong support for Iran against Israel for several reasons that relate to political, sectarian, and strategic factors. OIC members, particularly in the Gulf, are concerned about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. They view Iran’s potential development of nuclear weapons as a direct threat to regional security, further straining relations between Iran and other Islamic countries.
If the war with Israel expands, Iran will find itself alone and will realize the myth of Islamic Ummah the Hard Way.
(Balaji is a freelance writer with an MA in History and Pol science and has published articles on defense and strategic affairs and book reviews. He tweets @LaxmanShriram78. Views expressed are the author’s own.)
References:
- [1] https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S2448-654X2016000200283&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en
- [2] https://history.state.gov/milestones/1989-1992/gulf-war#:~:text=The%20invasion%20of%20Kuwait%20led,Kuwait%20on%20February%2028%2C%201991.
- [3] https://theweek.com/87832/wahhabism-what-is-it-and-why-does-it-matter
- [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahiliyyah
Balaji is a freelance writer with an MA in History and Political science and has published articles on defence and strategic affairs and book reviews. He tweets @LaxmanShriram78. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Aayush Pal 
Palak Dogra