Tag Archives: islam

Palestine’s Best Interests: Accepting Israel as Its Neighbor

Imagine this proposal: Pakistan, with its 150 million people, 350,000 square miles, and 80 years of history should simply cease to exist. Deport every Pakistani. Hand the territory to India. Sound absurd? It is. Pakistan has a formidable military, diplomatic ties with the USA, Russia, and China, and despite being ranked the 7th most hated country in 2024 by worldpopulationreview.com, it’s not going anywhere.

Now consider Israel—ranked 6th most hated, just ahead of Pakistan. A nation of 10 million on 9,000 square miles with a $50,000 GDP per capita and the Middle East’s most powerful military. Yet some advocate for its dissolution, suggesting all Israelis be expelled and the land given to Palestinians. Ask yourself: is this any more realistic than erasing Pakistan? The answer defines the conversation we should actually be having about Palestine’s future.

Since its founding, Israel has won every war it faced—the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the Six-Day War, the Yom Kippur War—always sustaining fewer casualties while inflicting more damage. The Israel Defense Forces command dominance on land, sea, and air. And whether we approve or not, Israel possesses nuclear weapons with second-strike submarine capabilities, making it untouchable militarily. But here’s the critical question: Have any of these wars produced long-term benefits for Palestinians? The answer is a resounding no. Each conflict has brought more suffering, more displacement, more lost opportunities.

WarIsraeli CasualtiesOpponent CasualtiesConsequences for the Palestinians
1948 Arab – Israeli War70006300750,000 Palestinians expelled
1967 Six Day War100015000400,000 Palestinians displaced from West Bank, Gaza
First Intifada280015000Creation of the West Bank area
Second Intifada10003500Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza strip
2023 Israel – Hamas War200050,000Aerial bombardment & invasion of Gaza

Military might alone doesn’t guarantee prosperity—just ask the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan called it “an empire of evil” in 1984, and within years, its members were fleeing westward for prosperity and freedom. The lesson? Diplomacy trumps tanks when building a sustainable future. Israel has learned this masterfully. Beyond its military prowess, it has systematically built a network of regional alliances: peace treaties with Egypt in 1980 and Jordan in 1994, then the Abraham Accords on September 15, 2020, when UAE and Bahrain recognized Israel, followed by Sudan. Yes, these are “cold peace” agreements. But remember Pakistan and India: a cold peace beats a hot war every single time.

Israeli Diplomacy in Action: Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, UAE, Bahrain, Sudan

Then came August 28, 2023. An Israeli flight made an emergency landing in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The passengers spent the night there. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked Saudi Arabia—in Hebrew—for the hospitality and “good neighborliness.” This wasn’t an accident. This was diplomatic theater, a warmup act before Saudi Arabia would join the Abraham Accords. Had Hamas not attacked on October 7, 2023, that union would likely have materialized. The message is clear: Germany and France fought from the Franco-Prussian War through WWII before building a prosperous European Union together. Middle Eastern powers understand this precedent. They know regional cooperation beats perpetual conflict.

Before: Berlin, Germany in ruins while Moscow, Soviet Union celebrates in 1945 following WWII

Consider Germany in 1945. Not just defeated—destroyed. Split in two. Industrial capacity plundered. Military obliterated. Four million men dead. Twelve million Germans expelled from Eastern and Central Europe in what historians debate may constitute genocide. The Soviet Union, meanwhile, emerged as WWII’s greatest victor, commanding the world’s most powerful army and inspiring communist movements globally. Fast forward 50 years. The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Germany reunited and became the world’s third-largest economy, an industrial juggernaut, the de facto leader of the European Union, and one of the world’s most desirable destinations for immigrants. The Germans went from pariah to prosperity in two generations. Are Palestinians worse off than post-WWII Germans? Does Palestine have more global sympathy? If Germany could rise from total destruction, what’s stopping Palestine?

After: Germany reunites in 1990 while the Soviet Union splits up in 1991

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: corrupt leadership has devastated Palestinian prospects. The PLO, Fatah, and Hamas all started with genuine aspirations for statehood but became seduced by international aid money. These organizations have siphoned billions while ordinary Palestinians remain impoverished. Blaming Israel for Palestine’s misfortunes becomes pointless when internal corruption remains unaddressed. Since the Oslo Accords in 1992, progress has stalled—not primarily because of Israeli obstruction, but because Palestinian leadership has failed its people.

So what should Palestinians do? Accept reality and build from there. With the USA and Arab states as mediators, Palestinian leaders should secure recognition of Palestinian statehood—even if it means accepting painful compromises like not having Jerusalem as the capital and recognizing Israel’s right to exist. Then fix internal governance. Develop a political system that serves the people, not the leaders’ bank accounts. This is prerequisite to everything else. Build a real economy. Stop depending on foreign aid. Create industries, jobs, and infrastructure. Avoid the Islamist routes of Afghanistan and Somalia or the militant route of Sudan—these lead to violence and failed states. Instead, look to Jordan and the UAE as role models. These nations have built stable, prosperous societies that balance tradition with pragmatic governance.

If Palestinians implement this pragmatic vision, they can replicate the UAE’s success within decades and join the ranks of respectable Middle Eastern nations. The alternative—clinging to fantasies of Israel’s erasure—means another 80 years of suffering, corruption, and missed opportunities. Germany rose from the ashes. Japan rebuilt from atomic devastation. South Korea emerged from military dictatorship to become an economic powerhouse. Vietnam unified and is now a manufacturing hub. Even Rwanda has become an African success story after genocide. The question isn’t whether Palestinians can succeed. It’s whether Palestinian leadership will finally choose pragmatism over ideology, prosperity over perpetual grievance, and their children’s future over political theater.

The path exists. It requires swallowing pride, accepting uncomfortable compromises, and focusing relentlessly on building rather than destroying. Eighty years of the current approach have failed. Perhaps it’s time to try something different.

With a Little Help From My ‘Friends’

Throughout history, great powers have mastered the art of controlling nations without conquest. The strategy is elegant in its simplicity: first, secure influence through financial incentives—mining rights in Ghana, oil fields in Syria, coffee plantations in Nicaragua. When cooperation falters, they activate Plan B. This backup plan never requires boots on the ground. Instead, they fund local insurgents with cash and weapons, train fighters in secondary locations far from scrutiny, and control the narrative through media, painting even questionable groups as freedom fighters. The genius lies in plausible deniability. If the operation fails, there’s no accountability. If it succeeds, a puppet government emerges. Either way, the superpower wins. But what about the people caught in the middle?

Senator John McCain with Syrian rebels

When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the world watched as poorly armed Mujahideen guerrillas achieved the impossible—defeating one of two global superpowers. Foreign fighters, primarily from Pakistan and Arab states, joined the cause. Desperate against Soviet brutality, Afghans welcomed every able-bodied volunteer. The strategy worked. By 1989, the Soviets withdrew in defeat, and the Muslim world erupted in celebration. Then came the reckoning. Civil war tore apart the coalition that had fought together. The Taliban emerged victorious in 1996, imposing brutal policies including banning women from education—a direct assault on Islamic values in the name of Islam. The foreign fighters who had “saved” Afghanistan left behind a fractured nation unable to govern itself.

The pattern repeated in Chechnya. Following the Soviet collapse, Chechnya fought for independence from 1992 to 1996. Al-Qaeda operatives, including Saudi national Ibn al-Khattab, joined the fight. Against all odds, Chechnya won independence in 1996, and Muslims worldwide celebrated again. Surely these Islamist groups would help build a functioning state? Ibn al-Khattab had other plans. Rather than governance, he established terrorist training centers throughout the Caucasus. Internal fighting consumed the next two years. Enter Vladimir Putin. In 1999, Russia’s new Prime Minister launched a second war. This time, Chechnya was crushed and reintegrated into Russia. The brief taste of freedom—made possible partly by foreign fighters—ultimately cost Chechens their independence entirely.

Gaza presents the most recent example. In 2005, Hamas defeated the internationally-backed Fatah in democratic elections. Despite being militant and isolated, Hamas represented change, and Palestinians voted for hope. Muslims celebrated another Islamist victory. What followed was fratricidal nightmare. Instead of uniting against the threat on their borders, Hamas and Fatah plunged into civil war. Hamas assassinated Fatah members and supporters, imprisoned dissenters, and subjected questioners to torture. Most shocking, Hamas forces shot Palestinian civilians attempting to collect humanitarian aid. The pattern repeated: initial victory, followed by devastating internal conflict that harmed civilians more than the external enemy ever had.

A Familiar Story: Infighting in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Gaza

The uncomfortable truth is this: since the 1990s, when Islamist foreign fighters join liberation movements in Muslim states, they consistently cause more damage to civilians than the non-Muslim oppressors they claimed to fight. Why does this happen? Young men who become foreign fighters are fanatical soldiers but terrible rulers. Their skills lie in combat, their mindset in martyrdom. They actively seek conflict rather than stability, lack administrative capacity to govern, refuse to yield power to civilian leadership, thrive in chaos instead of peace, and transform victories into warlord fiefdoms. Numbers feel reassuring during desperate struggles, but history screams a warning: the cost of foreign fighter assistance far exceeds any temporary military advantage.

Muslim nations will continue facing moments when populations demand change from entrenched rulers. This is natural in the transition toward effective governance, but success requires learning from past mistakes. When removing an overstaying leader, the process must prioritize legal mechanisms whenever possible, ensure leadership succession is planned before transition begins, use military force sparingly and under civilian oversight, accept financial assistance cautiously favoring humanitarian aid over weapons, and establish one firm red line: no foreign fighters under any circumstances. Foreign fighters transform homelands into mercenary playgrounds. What begins as “assistance” evolves into competing warlord factions fighting for territory, extended conflict long after the original grievance, state collapse as seen in Afghanistan and Somalia, international intervention with strings attached, and lost sovereignty as external powers claim stakes. The principle is simple: if change cannot be achieved by the local population using primarily local resources, then the change is not truly yours. Victory obtained through foreign military intervention becomes a hollow achievement—you trade one master for another.

External powers have long manipulated Muslim nations by funding insurgencies and backing armed groups. This strategy works because we allow it to work. By accepting foreign fighters, we invite external interests to dictate our futures. Mastering self-determination means accepting that genuine change takes longer without foreign assistance, understanding that harder-won victories are more sustainable, recognizing that civilian casualties from internal conflict destroy the legitimacy of any cause, building administrative capacity alongside military resistance, and planning for governance before achieving military victory. Every liberation movement faces a critical decision point: accept foreign fighters and boost numbers immediately, or reject them and fight with only local support. History has rendered its verdict. The short-term gain of foreign fighters leads to long-term catastrophe. The initial victory celebrations ring hollow when civil war follows. The young martyrs who helped win freedom become the warlords who destroy it.

If the Ummah embraces this lesson, we achieve two crucial victories: we neutralize the external power strategy of controlling us through funded insurgencies, and we guarantee that our change is authentically ours—built by local people, for local people, with local legitimacy. The path is harder. The timeline is longer. The sacrifice is greater. But the outcome is ours to keep.

Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Gaza teach the same painful lesson: foreign assistance in liberation struggles comes with a price tag that compounds over decades. The Afghans, Chechens, and Palestinians are worse off today than before their “victories.” The question is not whether Muslim nations will face internal struggles for reform and justice—they will. The question is whether we’ll repeat the mistakes of the past, or finally internalize the lesson written in blood across multiple continents. True liberation cannot be outsourced. Freedom fighters who understand governance, who plan for peace as carefully as for war, who prioritize civilian protection over martyrdom—these are the forces that build lasting change. Reject the foreign fighters. Accept the longer road. Own your destiny. Only then will victory mean something more than a temporary celebration before the next tragedy.

Three is a Magic Number

The traditional view is clear: a woman’s place is at home, nurturing children, managing the household. Religion reinforces this. Culture celebrates it. But what if this narrow path isn’t just limiting—what if it’s holding back entire communities? The question isn’t whether women should stay home. It’s whether confining them to only that role serves anyone well. I propose a different model: the Triangle—three interconnected pillars that create thriving individuals, strong families, and healthy societies.

Since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, something troubling has emerged in Muslim discourse: Taliban apologia. I’ve witnessed it firsthand. After Jummah prayer, an elderly man praised the Taliban for bringing the “correct system” to Afghanistan. Yet I guarantee he would never send his granddaughter—whom he cherishes—to live under that system. She attends school here in the USA, reaping the benefits of education he denies Afghan girls deserve. Social media amplifies this hypocrisy. Influencers post dreamy reels from Afghanistan: a man silhouetted against a sunset, peaceful music playing. “Look how serene it is,” they caption. When confronted about girls being banned from schools, they defend it as “Islamic.” Yet these same influencers would run through hell with a gasoline can before sending their daughters or sisters to Afghanistan. This double standard reveals the truth: they know education matters.

The Islamist paradise we dream of?

The real danger isn’t just Taliban policy in Afghanistan—it’s that this thinking can metastasize. What starts as praise for a distant regime can become ideology at home. We must be clear: denying girls education robs them of agency, opportunity, and the tools to improve their lives. The solution isn’t radical. Girls-only schools, staffed entirely by women, can satisfy cultural concerns while delivering results. The non-negotiable standard: every girl completes education equivalent to a high school diploma by age eighteen. No exceptions.

The data is unambiguous: children raised by married parents have better outcomes across virtually every metric. This isn’t about moral judgment—it’s about practical reality. Raising a family demands discipline, partnership, and planning. It transforms both men and women into functional, contributing members of society. Children born outside of marriage face steeper odds: boys are more likely to join gangs and end up incarcerated; girls are more likely to become teenage mothers themselves, perpetuating a cycle. Here, Muslim communities are succeeding. As of 2024, children born to unmarried Muslim mothers are statistically negligible. Even when single-parent households exist, they typically result from divorce or a partner’s death—not from never having married. This pillar is secure. We’ve nailed it.

Here’s the controversial one: every Muslim woman should pursue a career—even if she’s not financially obligated to work. Yes, every woman. The one living in a village in Peshawar. The one married to a billionaire sheikh in Qatar. The one whose husband earns enough for ten families. Why? Because a career exposes women to the world beyond their walls. That world shapes politics, economics, education, technology—forces that will inevitably affect their children, their lifestyle, their future. Better to have a direct view of how that world operates than to be blindsided by changes you never saw coming.

“But who will manage the household?” you ask. The answer emerged from an unlikely source: COVID-19. The pandemic normalized remote work. What began as an emergency measure has become permanent infrastructure. Millions of jobs—especially in technology, education, marketing, and professional services—now offer remote options. This isn’t a temporary accommodation; it’s the new normal, and it’s still expanding. This is the sweet spot for Muslim women: careers that align with their interests and values, performed from home. They can monitor their children’s development, manage the household, and participate meaningfully in the economy. Technology roles often pay well, offering financial benefits alongside intellectual engagement. Two birds, one stone.

Triangle for Muslim Women: Education, Career and Family

When all three pillars align—education, stable marriage, and career—a triangle forms. Geometry teaches us that triangles are the strongest structures. The same principle applies here. The tragedy is that most Muslim societies hit two out of three: education and marriage but no career (the traditional model); marriage and career but delayed or inadequate education; or education and career but instability in family structure (rare, but growing in some Western contexts). Two-thirds isn’t enough. An incomplete triangle collapses.

This isn’t about abandoning tradition—it’s about fulfilling it more completely. Islam doesn’t forbid women’s education; ignorance does. Islam doesn’t prohibit women’s professional contributions; rigid cultural interpretations do. The question isn’t whether Muslim women can achieve all three pillars. It’s whether we’ll create the conditions that allow them to. The framework exists. The technology enables it. The only thing missing is will. Can Muslim women complete the triangle? The better question: will we let them?

We’re One, But We’re Not The Same

What if I told you that Muslim unity has never existed and that’s good thing?

Chris Rock had a funny bit in his standup routine where he introduced the stripper myth. The comedian played on the idea that women become strippers to pay for college tuition. There is a similar myth that I would call the unity myth. It is the idea that certain groups of people based upon race, skin color, nationality were always united. Let’s explore this in relatable events in the 2000s.

1. Activists in the Black Lives Matter movement preach that black people all over the world should be united and if they did, that would result in a utopia. Compare a Muslim man from Abuja, Nigeria who prays 5x to Allah and the Christian man in Bahir Das, Ethiopia who is a devout follower of Christ. Would the former rejoice to live under the Christian’s rule all because they have the same melanin?

2. There is a purity movement in Colorado, USA where the daughters pledge their virginity to their fathers and wait till they get married before engaging in sexual intercourse. The purity movement wants to spread into the rest of the USA. What do you think the effects would be if this movement was given the power to control a woman from Miami from engaging in intimacy. Would women in liberal states be receptive to being dictated when they can have sex by a bunch of middle-aged men from another state all because they are united by nationality?

A similar unity myth being fantasized by Muslims where we become powerful when we are united. You don’t believe me? Go to the mosque during Eid and you will hear the Imam preach about how Muslims are not united by a common ideology and that we should strive to do that. The problem with this is that one Muslim’s utopia is another’s nightmare. The fact that the Muslim population has exceeded 2 billion does not help. There are various factions within Islam that want to dictate the Muslim world and use violence that results in the death of Muslims. Funnily, even amongst factions, there is infighting on what the rules should be. Historically, there never was a Muslim unity. After the death of Muhammad in 632AD, civil war resulted that led to the murder of both the Prophet’s grandsons Husayn and Hasan. The Muslim world has been split ever since but that is good as there are options. The Christian world was initially split into Catholicism and Protestantism; Judaism even more. Have these religions not progressed? Did the presence of a Reform Jew destroy the practices of the Hasidic one? Even the major religions understand that for unity to occur, there has to be divine intervention. Coincidentally, all 3 Abrahamic religions have an ideal time point when they would be united:

  1. Judaism: Moshiach arrives to build the third temple
  2. Christianity: Jesus arrives to heal the world after the Rapture
  3. Islam: Mahdi comes at the End Times to battle the Dajjal and unite all Muslims

Trying to unite all Muslims by force is the mother of good intentions going astray. This results in a central power that uses the threats of violence and intimidation to ‘unite’ Muslims. History has shown us that eventually there to be infighting amongst the ruling power resulting in more chaos.

Muslim Unity: the diversity of Muslims should be embraced

The Muslim world must be careful with the idea of ‘uniting the Muslim world’. Like what happened with the FLDS, the wrong group can take charge. It is in our best interest to have different subsets to choose from as the diversity will cater to the 2 billion Muslims on the planet. Plus, it shows us what system works and what does not. Even if your ideal group is in charge, history has shown us that power corrupts people. Men with the noblest intentions change into tyrants once they get power.

If I Leave Here Tomorrow, Would You Still Remember Me?

The war in Ukraine that started in 2022 when Russia invaded was one of the few wars where Ukraine instated a draft, forcing males between 25 – 50 to enter the military and fight for Ukraine. Lots of men have escaped by leaving the country or getting exceptions. The most amusing ones were the ones where the draftees have been hiding. Videos exist of these men being taken against their will to be recruited. Granted that Ukraine is fighting an existential threat from the Putin regime in Russia. The questions still arose, on if this would lead to weariness and later anger by the Ukrainians on fighting a war that they do not want to?

A military consisting of recruits who join voluntarily would have a higher morale than one. The recruits would take pride in the fact that everyone joined because they have similar interests and the success of the group. A happy union would be formed. It is for this reason, that the most powerful nation in the world, the USA, has not had a draft since the Vietnam war. Yet they have had enormous military successes in Iraq (x2), Grenada, Serbia, and Afghanistan. Yes, some of them may have been political failures but as a military the functioned amazingly and did not need a draft to make them more effective. In fact, having a draft would have made the war weariness arrive quicker.

Right at the year 1900, the population of the Muslim world was 90 million Still, by the end of the 21st century, the Muslim population will hit the 3 billion mark. The faith has grown tremendously in regions in Europe and even South America, where Islam was a flicker. Yet, critics of Islam often ask the question, what is the punishment for apostasy in Islam? They bring up how the faith is akin to a gang where individuals aren’t allowed to leave. We must ask, do we really want to have an individual in the faith if that person wants to leave it? Remember, if disallowed, this would attract the coverage of the international media that would destroy the image of Muslims. Even if this is not an issue, a lot of younger Muslims would be watching this and hold a grudge against the faith. Let’s explore this point with a specific example from the 2010s.

Meriam Ishag from South Sudan was born to a Muslim father and Christian mother. When she was older, she married a Christian man and was accused of leaving Islam. She was asked by the religious institutions to convert back into Islam of face death for apostasy. When she refused, the authorities responded by arresting her and shackling her to a prison. Mind you, Meriam was 8 months pregnant. Later, a religious scholar came to the prison to attempt to convert this shackled pregnant woman. She still refused. After much international pressure – including other Muslim countries, Meriam was granted asylum in the USA. From a publicity point of view, how did this make Muslims look? What did other Muslims think of this? Did this encourage others to enter the religion? The truth is the media outlets of the world responded with disgust and critics responded that Muslims were like a gang and did not allow others to leave. The worst consequence were the doubts ignited in young followers of the faith, that Islam was weak.

Islam is okay with people joining the faith at their convenience. Similarly, the faith would do fine if individuals decide to leave it. In fact, it would make us stronger and form a cohesive bond knowing we willingly follow the same path. The silver lining is that the newer reverts to Islam end up becoming the best leaders for the faith and will lead us forward better a person who is only there due to force. Apostasy laws have been relaxed in most Islamic countries, but occasionally there are radical preachers who want to punish an apostate. Muslims should stop this and understand that it is in the Ummah’s best interests to let individuals leave when they see best fit. Quality is better than quantity.

Hearing Without Listening

In the Muslim world, great respect is given to individuals who memorize the Quran. Usually, the memorization process begins during childhood one line at a time. Once completed, the male is given the title Hafiz and the female the title Hafiza becoming crown jewels of the community. Such individuals are said to receive high blessings and are rewarded greatly by Allah.

I am no pessimist. It is good to memorize the holy book you believe in – provided you understand the language. I recall during middle school, I memorized and recite poems by Wordsworth, Tennyson and other English writers. Granted, the English from previous centuries was not easy to comprehend, but since I understood the language, I eventually got an idea of what the verses meant. Maybe this is a strategy to implement? Let’s put it another way. You have the book Meditations by Marcus Aurelius in Latin. In 10 years, would you rather learn to recite the book beautifully but have no idea what it means? Or learn the language so you can read the book and understand its contents on your own?

Madrasa in Pakistan: Children start as young as five

Children should only be put through the memorization program after learning the language of the Quran. This will give them the wisdom to understand it and may even make it easier to memorize it later. Simply doing a copy-paste method from the Arabic institutions will not bring change as the Hafiz from Arab nations understand the language in the Quran easier. A solution is to have two different curriculums in Madrasas. One for direct memorization for those who already understand the language. The second is for those to learn to recite and understand the language. Accept that the Arab speaking world is ahead in terms of memorizing the Quran. But the rest of the Muslims should focus on understanding it first. It builds a skill in children to learn a language for the sake of God. Wouldn’t that serve tremendously for their faith as opposed to memorizing a language they can recite?

In every country, there should be a group of religious scholars who did not know Arabic as their first language but had to learn it and understand. Due to their education, they can understand every word of the Quran when reciting it. A unique title should be given to them. These scholars should serve as teachers to young Muslims like the scholars today who teach to recite. An extra impact of this is that it will prioritize comprehension over memorization – which is needed.