Iran and Islamic Government - Assignment Example

POLITICS By (Name): Course: Tutor: Institution: City: Date: Politics Question 1 History The Iranian Revolution of 1978/ 1979 helped deliver the Islamic Government that has been instrumental in propelling the nation thus far. The characteristics of its existence has accounted for the distinct features in the government, which are present to this day as they influence the governance structures and fundamentals. It involved the overthrowing of Pahlavi Dynasty, which had been under the leadership of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, with its support from the United States. The eventual replacement came into fruition by the leader Grand Ayatollah Khomeini. The support under the latter regime was signified by Islamic and Leftist organizations. The demonstrations had begun in 1977 and changed into civil resistance, which included religion and secular elements (Merino 2012, p. 11). Despite defying the traditional causes of revolution like peasant rebellion, war defeat, financial crisis and the like, the country at the time enjoyed prosperity and wealth. Discussion The revolution’s aim of dealing with the westernized and secularized efforts set the tone for the occurrence. It has to be commended that the nation had not been faced by any of the traditional reasons that necessitated the backlash of issues like social injustices. Instead, the shift towards an Islamic setting was driven by the motivation and desire of the people. The Shah regime was earmarked with increasing oppression and brutal mannerisms. There was corruption and extravagance by the government. It supported the Shia version of Islamic revival aimed at dethroning the influence from the west (Hinnebusch 2012, p. 7). Through Khomeini’s leadership, the institution of the country’s mandate was changed into enacting the Sharia Law requirements for the people and the nation as a whole. The features of the governance, mandate and responsibilities are all responsible for the translated success the revolution brought about to the people of Iran. Discussion The most important feature of the Islamic Government under the leadership of Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini is that of the supreme leader. In the Islamic Republic, the most important and powerful position is that of the supreme leader. The assembly of experts is tasked with selecting the supreme leader for the country. The assembly of experts is a body, which is publicly elected and is under the guidance of the guardian council (Telhami 2008, p.11). The main symbol of the position held by the supreme leader is marked as head of state and accountable with some of the executive power on issues concerning religious affairs, defense and the Guardian Council. Throughout history, the position has been exempt from election politics although he is responsible for the assertion of authority to the president of the country. Along with two-thirds majority of the parliament, the leader can declare war as well as peace. The feature of the supreme leader provides fro the most critical and important aspect of the Islamic Government. The revolution began as a phenomenon regarding the elimination of all secular and western aspects of the authority within the country’s governance and laws. The instillation of the Islamic Government was then tasked with restoring the Sharia Law and maintaining the structures of good governance. Therefore, the supreme leader’s position was vital for its success. We can determine that the central position of its powers and responsibilities enabled the unity of the people and the government. Hinnebusch (2012, p,9) argues that the decision-making ability sand enforcement was the sure way to make sure that the portico was achieved, if there had been misinterpretation of different leaders, then the process of acquiring the mandate and change into Islamic Government would be futile. For the success of the Islamic Government to be achieved, it was critical that the president aligned as the second most important feature of the governance structure. In terms of power and responsibilities, the presidency represents the second highest on hierarchical basis. However, we must understand that all the powers bestowed on the institution had to be trimmed down in the constitution back to the supreme leader, in order for there to be a common understanding. According to Telhami (2008, p.17), the subordination of the executive powers provided for the momentum of close association and aligning of the roles, according to the required Islamic government procedures. For example, Iran is the only country that the president does not have control over the armed forces. He is concerned with the economic policies of the land. He also has nominal rule over the ministry of Intelligence and Security as well as National Security Council. Another of the outstanding features of the Iranian Islamic Government is the basing of the Sharia Law. It represents the basic derivation of all laws and legal system from the religious precepts of Islam. It resonates to the differences realized in human law since it is from the prophecy of Muhammad to the faithful. All of the Iranian Islamic Government basing of moral justice and jurisprudence are borrowed from the essence of Sharia Law. It is considered the infallible law of God to the Muslim and therefore has importance over their accord within the governance of the people Merino 2012, p. 11). It has characterized the unity shown by the people as well as the leaders and institutions like the supreme leader, the president, the parliament, the Guardian Council and the Parliament. Thus, chances of conflicts and disagreements are nullified for the benefit of the governance. Question 2 History The Iraq War had been sanctioned by the United States after the events of September 11, 2001 of the terrorists’ attacks in New York. After the loss of hundreds of lives, injuries faced to thousands, and the loss of property, the then president, George W. Bush, declared war on the terrorist cells, groups and organizations around the world. The aim was to rid these organizations of their abilities to propagate any terrorist activities and leading to crisis in their proceeds. Thus, with the institution of the Iraq War, based on the premise of weapons of mass destruction, several events unfolded within the country, that has increased the necessity to avert any further humanity (Juneau 2014, p. 14). With the invasion and call to help free the Iraqi people into freedom, the series of crisis occurrences have questioned the responsibility of the origins. The United States is responsible for the crisis that has bedeviled Iraq. Discussion The entry of the United States into Iraq was not mandated by any of the proceedings that had followed the terrorist attack on US soil as of 2001. The regime at the time headed by George W. Bush was categorical in stating that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, which were instrumental in spreading the terrorist activity, thereby causing potential risks to national and international security. Lewett (2013, p. 15) argues that the regime also stated that the country had had a history of supporting and purporting to acknowledge the terrorist cells and organization, as well as contributing to their economical status. Using the above reasons, warranted their entry into the United States and leading an invasion that has so far destabilized the country to this day. Therefore, the blame and consequence of the invasion should be aimed at the United States and its allies for the consequences of their action. The occupation of the United States and NATO forces within Iraq signified a brutal mechanism. From the events of the commencement on entry into the country, full-waged war was used to access the governance structures and central command. Along the process, several lives were lost of the service men and women, as well as innocent citizens. In the public eye, the war was based on military grounds and its use to affect a takeover mechanism (Jenkins 2013, p. 1). However, the degeneration was clear to see. Even young innocent children and family members were caught in the line of fire. The resultant effects were that there was no rule of law, stability and chain of command for all the people to follow, apart from the United States-led authority, and thus the crisis occurred. In order for the Iraq people to be conquered and ruled, the United States deployed sectarianism as means of dealing with any form of resistance. The Iraq people are originally divided along the ethical tribes and the Islamic sects. For example, The Sunni and Shia Muslims in the country belong to different ethnicities. In another setting, the ethnical basing from the peoples’ origins also creates the differences between them and their governance structures. It includes their settlement patterns, arrangements, and positional responsibilities within institutions, beliefs, and economical status (Jenkins 2013, p. 1). Their understanding and close unity is typified by religion ion most cases. In between, there is a level of differences in understanding and at times, division causes conflicts between the two. The United States and the NATO forces realized that they could usurp the differences of sectarianism as means of achieving control over the resistance from the people. Through sectarianism, the United States-led invasion was able to conquer the people. It was calculated and smoothly ensured within the mandate of the invasion as means of getting the control within the US. In turn, the differences among the different sects ensured that there was no strength in matters addressing the governance structures and formation of the government. Once the country was conquered and under the governance of the US, all proceeding had to be directed from the same. For example, the people were set for the period of enacting leaders, despite the divisions in the country. Thus, despite the lack of unity and affirmation to the rule of law by the people, procedures had to be effected (Juneau 2014, p. 13). Therefore, the results of the crisis stemming from differences between the sects and rising of the ISIS have to be laid on the US. Before the invasion of Iraq by the United States and its allied forces, there had not been sectarian war within Iraq. Former president Saddam Hussein’s regime had been predominantly of the Sunni elite. Nevertheless, the inclusion of Shia members and leaders was important for the unity factor in the country. However, the war based the differences on the people against each other without giving the true basis of its identity. Consequently, in the year 2006-2008, over three thousand deaths had been realized over the period because of sectarian war (Lewett 2013, p. 15). The awakening councils instituted by the United States fueled the processes further as support was incoming at the expense of the people. On the foresight, the crisis that is spilling into Syria and neighboring countries bears the results from the above mechanism. The US is responsible. Question 3 History The Islamic state of Iraq and Syria is a jihadist extremist group, which has its self-proclaimed caliphate and Islamic state composed of Sunni Arabs from the two countries. Within its current mandate, it has the control of over ten million people in both Syria and Iraq, while through loyalty in local groups has spread its reach to Afghanistan, Libya, and parts of Nigeria. The group had originated from the pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda in 2004 (Chomsky 2011, p. 16). Over the course of its formation, various complexities and crisis created in the different countries have enabled insurgency throughout the Arab world, with additional factors from within. Parts of the factors represented include the occurrence of Syrian crisis with its empowerment affecting the global stage. In addition, many of the fighters are being sourced from all around. The situation is complex with a culmination of historical, political, economic and social factors. Discussion The genesis of the creation of the Islamic state can be traced back to the US-led invasion into Iraq. The Iraq people are originally partitioned along the ethnic groups and the Islamic sects. For example, The Shia and Sunni Muslims in the country belong to different ethnicities. The ethnical basing from the peoples’ origins created the differences between them governance structures. It includes their settlement patterns, arrangements, and positional responsibilities within institutions, beliefs, and economical status. Their understanding and close unity is typified by religion in most cases. According to Berti (2015, p.1), with the disintegration of the people and uprising between them, violence took cause and spread into Syria. Similar basing of ethnicities was present and thus was easier to perpetrate the ethnic cleansing in the process. In turn, the formation of the Islamic State was easier to achieve with the extremism required from the allegiances pledged and loyalist groups. One of the unresolved complexities of the Islamic State formation is the regime of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad. Under his rule, the country had made changes in regards to civil rights of the people and uneventful rages towards the arms of government. The people blamed the president for the country’s deplorable state and insufficient manner of state responsibilities towards them. Chomsky (2011, p. 16) notes that the protests began calling for political reforms, reinstatement of civil rights, and calls towards the end of state of emergency. In retaliation to the protests, the president was instrumental in rebuffing the people’s pleas. The people wanted the reinstatement of the country’s leadership to different hands, and the president was unwilling. The uprising and civil war in the country was fuelled by the loss of lives in the process of power struggles between the different sides. The Arab spring within the Middle East can be attributed to the complex progress of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The first country to enable the organization and disenfranchising of the political leadership was realized in Algeria. It soon spread to Egypt, before it shifts to Middle East. As such, the flames of the process were set alight with the proceedings within other like-minded countries. In addition, the establishment of Arab countries in relation to Sharia Law was responsible for the uprisings and rooting for people-led governments within the area, as well as returning to Islamic Law as guiding principles in the process. The president’s attribution of foreign interference in the uprisings did little to help in escalation of the crisis, compounding the strengthening of ISIS to this day (Berti 2015, p.1). Without stability, progress and unity among the peoples, ISIS thrived. As an extremist group and historical allegiance to the Al-Qaeda, the development of the crisis has been complex, to say the least. At the pinnacle of the terrorism activities by Al-Qaeda, the group was in full support of the proceedings as well contribution to the same agenda. Within the disquiet contained by the people from Iraq’s invasion by the US and foreign countries, as well as crisis in Syria from the president’s regime, the propagation is fuelled by economic gains as well as political mileage (George 2014, p. 9). The ISIS obtains its financial base from wealthy individuals and organizations from external sources like Saudi Arabia as well seizures of important economic ventures within. Therefore, the rise of ISIS is compounded from the financial proceeds gained when there is no clear jurisdiction of governance and authority to the people. The Islamic religion and influence over the proceedings of the ISIS increases the empowerment and belief held by the people as well as support from across the world. Islam is the predominant religion in the area. Hence, the instructional basis of the religion helps in the mindset changes and loyalty to ISIS reign. The belief of apocalypse is though to occur around Syria, as more of a sanctuary and enablement of the teachings. George (2014, p. 12) argues that the increased support towards ISIS is trusted as the jihadist holy ground for the lasts battle before redemption. Consequently, the group’s calling on individuals to offer their support as well as participation has increased the number formation over the years as well as violence perpetration against all other religions. Question 4 History The foreign policy of the United States has its roots from before and after World War 2. The development was characterized by the support to all anticommunist groups against the Soviet Union and backing of Israel in the Arab World. The US’s power within the Middle East was significant in the support of political regimes that were needed by the people, apart from delivering financial and social backing. Majority of the countries in the region became significant partners and thus the US exercised its grown power. Freedman (2008, p. 12) argues that after becoming the sole superpower, the influence was realized as an international watchdog over all proceeds in the world. It included curtailing the efforts of some of the nation, which were deemed as appropriating matters and activities that were against the policies of the US. As the years and invasions have increased, the power has waned in the Middle East. Discussion The decline of the US power in Middle East can be attributed to the expectations of interventions and military action. From the invasions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and quelling of terrorist activities, the development of diplomacy has increasingly failed. They have become too many and the military action can lead to failure as witnessed through the crises created thus far. Similarly the law enhancements throughout has decreased the US value in the area. There is also an exaggerated belief by the people that the US has a geo-strategic plan for the region (Pollack 2011, p. 14). The impact of the US presence in the regions is labeled on even the local occurrences, leading to blame on the problems experienced, as well as non-applicable solutions and strategies. Over the years, increases in the above strategic failures have diminished the country’s power in the area. The regimes in the area face internal threats, and the need for US presence is decreased. The threats on internal basis are resistant to external pressure. Instead, they use it as motivation in their propagation of extremisms and violence. The determination to retaliate cannot even be stopped by the United States, and thus increase in the diplomatic pressures has left the US vulnerable to decreased value over the proceedings. On the other hand, the threats and fast-breaking developments have become harder to deal with in the region. It increases the constant revision and focus by the American intelligence in matters of information and investigation. The pressure developed renders the US incapable of timely response to the situations (Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Satloff, and Clawson, 2007, p. 13). Inadvertently, the economic might of the US cannot deal with the situations promptly and increase its power in the region to such lengths of domination and support from the nations. The events in the Middle East have increased the need for the US to change its allegiance and transfer loyalties in the institutions of governance. At the beginning, the US was forthright in its powers through support of regimes that instituted democracy and respect to human rights. However, after the invasions and assumption of power by different regimes, the allegiances have shifted, incorporating the same ones that used to be backed. In turn, the confidence and political will to act has decreased over the years. For example, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been the most high profile and costly (Pollack 2011, p. 14). There is growing skepticism by the US in military intervention as solutions have not been achieved fro the betterment of the people and the situations. In addition, the opponents to the US have marked the undercutting diplomatic muscle from them and increased their influence. The shifts from domestic stronghold on diplomatic issues have increased the withdrawal of America’s influence in the Middle East. The US depends on its operations in the region basing on congressional agreement and decision-making process as well as the nation’s input from the people. The differences have to be in line with the democratization principles and matter son national security. However, the nation is divided on the positioning of the country within the region. It has led to decreased deployment and control of the matter (Freedman 2008, p. 16). The constituents of the two principles are in conflict and thus the power cannot thrive where expected. On the other hand, there are often no better options for the US. It has been stated that the routes used before have been characterized by war or diplomacy. Increased rebel activities and stances have made the influence weaker in the regions as the struggle between dictatorship and rebellions. The dependence of Arab oil from the Middle East can be seen as a constraint as well as a national interest. All the same, it has constrained the US policy in the region, leading to its decline of the influence (Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Satloff, and Clawson, 2007, p. 13). Since the dependence is on the decline, intervention from the endless crises can facilitate the involvement of the US. In addition, there is an aggregated lesser stake in the process for the US as opposed to national interest. Over time, the influence is diminished as both fear and uncertainties have crept. References: Berti, B, The Syria Crisis: Regional and Human Implications and Concerns, FAS Organization, viewed 17 November 2015, < https://www.fas.org/sgp/.../RL33487.pd...> Chomsky, N, 2011, Iran and Islamic Government, Cultural Critique Journal, Vol. 19, pp 14-31. Freedman, L, 2008, A choice of enemies America confronts the Middle East. New York, Public Affairs. George, K, 2014, ISIS and the Third Wave of Jihadism, Current History Journal, Vol. 2. No. 3. pp-7-21. Hinnebusch, R, 2012, The American Invasion of Iraq: Causes, SAM Centre Journal, Vol. 4, No.12, pp 1-11. Jenkins, B, 16 September 2013, 10 Reasons U.S Influence has Fallen in the Middle East, Slate News, 1. Juneau, T, 2014, U.S Power in the Middle East not Declining, Middle East Policy Council, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 1-17. Lewett, H, 2013, How Precipitous a Decline?- U.S- Iran Relations and the Transition from American Primacy, Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp 17-22. Merino, N, 2012, The Middle East. Detroit, Greenhaven Press. Pollack, K, 2011, The Arab awakening America and the transformation of the Middle East, Washington, DC, Brookings Institution. Telhami, S, 2008, The stakes: America and the Middle East: the consequences of power and the choice for peace, Boulder, Colo, Westview Press. Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Satloff, R, B, & Clawson, P, 2007, navigating through turbulence: America and the Middle East in a new century, Washington, DC, Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Read More