Part One. Informaton from wikipedia page Caliphate
The term caliphate, "dominion of a caliph ('successor')" (from the Arabic خلافة or khilāfa, Turkish: Hilafet), refers to the first system of
government established in Islam and represented the leader's unity of the Muslim Ummah (community)[clarification needed]. In theory, it is an
aristocratic–constitutional republic (the Constitution being the Constitution of Medina), which means that the head of state, the Caliph, and
other officials are representatives of the people and of Islam and must govern according to constitutional and religious law, or Sharia. In its early
days, it resembled elements of direct democracy (see shura) and an elective monarchy
The following excerpt from the Qur'an, known as the 'Istikhlaf Verse', is used by some to argue for a Quranic basis for Caliphate:
God has promised those of you who have attained to faith and do righteous deeds that, of a certainty, He will make them Khulifa on earth, even as He
caused [some of] those who lived before them to become Khulifa; and that, of a certainty, He will firmly establish for them the religion which He has
been pleased to bestow on them; and that, of a certainty, He will cause their erstwhile state of fear to be replaced by a sense of security [seeing
that] they worship Me [alone], not ascribing divine powers to aught beside Me. But all who, after [having understood] this, choose to deny the truth
– it is they, they who are truly iniquitous!" [24:55] (Surah Al-Nur, Verse 55)
Islamic history shows that large empire with one ruler(caliph) is the norm for the region post Muhammad. I briefly took Arabic classes, and my teacher
said that most Arabs will identify with Islam before nation. Their theology contains a political element that Western thought opposes. In Islam,
seperation of church and state is sacrilage. It is the natural state of Islam to be unified politically. The nation state structure we see on maps is
largely a Western post colonial creation and doesn't properly reflect Islamic politics.
Part 2. Modern Movement
Now in the world today, the caliph movement is bound to gain momentum. America is an empire. The Eurozone is essentially a unified economic entity and
has near equal influence to America. China is an emerging empire. India has a billion people.
The only logical response for the Islamic world is to unite in order to have a proportional influence on the world.
SPEAKING at a policy conference on Monday, 7 February, 2011 Benjamin Netanyahu spoke of the ambitions of radical Muslims of both Sunni and Shia
persuasion to build a new Islamic kingdom of global dimensions.
Addressing the gathering in Jerusalem organised by the European Friends of Israel, Israel's Prime Minister spoke of:
-The expressed ambition of Shia and Sunni radical muslims to build a Islamic kingdom or “caliphate” that will encompass the Middle East and North
Africa, and then Europe, and then North America, and then the entire world. Netanyahu did not say the caliphate would be achieved, but he rightly
warned that this is what the Radicals want to achieve.
-The rise of an Iranian regime with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles that can not only reach Israel but more and more of Europe.
-An Egypt that doesn’t develop into a peaceful, moderate, secular democracy with a prominent role for the military to provide stability and security
but into one of two other scenarios: A) one in which “the Islamists exploit the[ir] influence to gradually take the country into a reverse
direction, not towards modernity and reform but backward; or B) one in which “Egypt would go the way of Iran, where calls for progress would be
silenced by a dark and violent repression that subjugates its own people and threatens everyone else.”
-Netanyahu did not say these threats would inevitably come to pass. To the contrary, he stated clearly, “The good news is that nothing is
inevitable. We have the power to protect our common civilization, to roll back the forces of radicalism and to advance a secure peace. One of the keys
to defeating this fanaticism is to be able to distinguish friends from enemies.”
The Muslim Brotherhood, majority party in Egypt has publicly advocated pan-Islamic ideology. Iran and Saudi Arabia are theocratic governments. This is
a serious possibility.
And will their foreign policy follow scripture like this?
. Qur'an 9:29 " Fight those people of the Book (Jews and Christians) who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, do not refrain from what has
been prohibited by Allah and His Messenger and do not embrace the religion of truth (Al-Islam), until they pay Jizya (protection tax) with their own
hands and feel themselves subdued."
Many here speak of the evils of the West. Surely, we realize that any inherent evil is magnified by influential capacity. Consider this influential
capacity: Map of Muslim World
Nations, Muslim Pop, (% of total pop)
Indonesia 204,847,000 (88.1%)
Pakistan 178,097,000 (96.4%)
India 177,286,000 (14.6%)
Bangladesh 145,312,000 (90.4%)
Nigeria 75,728,000 (47.9%)
Iran 74,819,000 (99.6%)
Turkey 74,660,000 (98.6%)
Egypt 73,746,000 (90%)
Algeria 34,780,000 (98.2%)
Morocco 32,381,000 (99.9%)
Iraq 31,108,000 (98.9%)
Sudan 30,855,000 (97%) 
Afghanistan 29,047,000 (99.8%)
Ethiopia 28,721,000 (33.8%)
Uzbekistan 26,833,000 (96.5%)
Saudi Arabia 25,493,000 (97.1%)
Yemen 24,023,000 (99.0%)
China 23,308,000 (1.8%)
Syria 20,895,000 (92.8%)
Malaysia 17,139,000 (61.4%)
Russia 16,379,000 (11.7%)
Niger 15,627,000 (98.3%)
The total GDP of 57 Muslim nations is US$6.2 trillions in nominal exchange rates as of 2011 IMF outlook
Total population is approximately 1.5 billion.
Finally, a site specifically devoted to the cause: www.khilafah.com...
That's the best resource to understand this issue. Today's daily Hadith:
If the pledge of allegiance is given to 2 rulers (Khalifatain), kill the latter of them.
So my questions are:
1.) Is it possible that fragmenting the Islamic world is the primary purpose of current war? Don't we have more to lose from a challenging empire than
we have to gain from oil supply (often speculated motive)?
2.) Should a caliphate be allowed to form?
3.) What would be the significant effect if it did?
4.) Is the development of super states (America, China, Eurozone, possibly Islamic) a positive or negative on human society?
5.) Would a unified Islamic state be peaceful or jihadist?
6.) Is the ultimate clash inevitable, unavoidable?
7.) Speculations on relation to 9/11 or Obama?
8.) Am I missing any key points/questions?
Note: Speculative on many accounts. I, personally, don't see Islam or the West as primarily negative entities and maintain optimism with regard to
progress of human global society. The argument presented is intended to spark discussion aiming to inform and present ideas helpful to the cause of a
productive future relationship between Islamic and Western political units and progressive quality of life for the citizens of both.
21-8-2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-8-2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)