Can a Muslim vote for Ranil - buddy of Bush, Blair and Brown?

In the period leading up to the elections in the east Rauf Hakeem, the leader of the Sri Lankan Muslim Congress, flew to Mecca, presumably to impress the electorate that as the latest Al Haj he has a better claim for Muslim votes in the east. Of course, this is his way of showing that he is the champion of Islam and Muslims. But is he? As they say, you are known by the company you keep. Or to put it another way, birds of a feather flock together.

So is it surprising to find Hakeem flocking together with Ranil Wickremesinghe? All in all, there is, in his pilgrimage, an element of politicizing his religion for political gain.

His political buddy Ranil Wickremesinghe, on the other hand, flew to Sydney, which is in the opposite direction, to participate in the International Democratic Union (IDU) - the Mecca of the leading anti-Muslim Club in the world.

The IDU is the gigantic fortress of Conservative right-wing Christian Democrats who have a vested interest in keeping the Muslims and the Arabs down both abroad and in their own countries.

The IDU website states officially: “The International Democrat Union (IDU) is a working association of over 80 Conservative, Christian Democrat and like-minded political parties of the centre and centre right.”

Both have returned to contest the elections in the east on a common platform of defeating President Mahinda Rajapaksa - the only political leader who has a street named after him in Palestine. In Ramallah where our embassay is situated a street was named after President Rajapaksa.

This significant honour bestowed on President Rajapaksa is a remarkable and unambiguous symbol that should make any Muslim sit up and ask: why hasn’t Wickremesinghe or his buddy Hakeem achieved such a distinction in the eyes of the oppressed Palestinians and Muslims abroad? Besides, the late Arafat was a close friend of President Rajapaksa.

He has gone out of his way to cultivate the friendship of the Muslim leaders the world over. Among other Muslim leaders, he has met President Musharaff, rulers of UAE and Emir of Kuwait.

Wickremesinghe, on the other hand, rushes to hobnob with the likes of Bush, Jacques Chirac and John Howard, well-known anti-Muslim leaders who have publicly demanded that the Muslim community should conform to Christian values in their countries. For instance, at a time when President Rajapaksa was issuing free hijabs to cover the heads of Muslim girls Chirac Blair and Brown insisted that Muslims must not wear the hijab and the buraka.

This anti-Muslim attitude is common to most Western political leaders who dominate the IDU. Here’s a short list of the IDU leadership: Chairman, John Howard; Deputy Chairman Jan (pro-Tiger) Petersen, Norway, right-wing Conservative Party; Assistant Chairman, William Hague, Conservative Party, UK; Vice Chairman, Brendt Bendtsen, right-wing Conservative Party, Denmark; Helen C. C. Lin, right-wing, anti-China, Kuomintang, Taiwan; Sen. Carlon Holguin, Conservative Party, Columbia; Edmund Stolbar, Christian and Social Democratic Party, Germany; Secretary, Eirik Moen, Conservative Party, Norway; Stepehen J Hunter, Conservative Party, Cananda, etc., etc.Which one of them is a friend of the Muslims?

So how can Hakeem stand on the same platform with Wickremesinghe who stands shoulder to shoulder with all the anti-Muslim forces of the world? Hakeem and Wickremesinghe come from opposite directions not only geographically (Mecca and Sydney) but also politically and ideologically, unless one has totally surrendered to the other? If so who has surrendered to whom?

Has Hakeem surrendered totally to the anti-Muslim, anti-Arab politics of right-wing Wickremesinghe who is a regional leader in the IDU? Can he be a leader of the IDU if he is not committed (covertly in Sri Lanka and overtly abroad) to the anti-Muslim politicies of the right-wing Christian democrats in the IDU?

Facts and figures

In contrast, take also the visit of Iranian President Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is a clear signal to the Christian fundamentalists like Bush, who claims that his (Christian) God speaks to him, that Sri Lanka is ready to find other friends if the West rejects its legitimate claims to conduct its own affairs without kow-towing to Western dictates, or surrendering to the Tiger terrorists.

In fact, this issue has even provoked Stepehen Sackur of BBC HARD TALK, to raise concerns about it, trying his level best to corner Nivard Cabraal, the Governor of the Central Bank.

To the credit of Nivard, it must be said that he not only fended off cleverly and effectively questions of Sackur who was trying to bully him but also turned the tables on him by bamboozling the BBC bull dog with disarming facts and figures.

If Sri Lanka is swinging the other way it is the Western diplomats who are to be blamed. They have handled Sri Lanka insensitively, arrogantly and immorally. When one of Sri Lanka’s leading representatives visited the State Department he wasn’t even given a chance to make his case. The pompous Yankee panjandrum wagged his finger and laid down the law that should be obeyed by Sri Lanka.

Reacting to this insensitive and bullying approach Sri Lanka has been forced to go on the diplomatic offensive and change course. Sri Lanka is also refusing to roll over like a puppy, with it legs in the air, and whimper pitifully for the masters to scratch its belly. No.

Whenever the opportunity arises Sri Lanka is giving back as a good as it gets. For instance, the word buzzing in diplomatic circles not so long ago was how the Dutch ambassador was summoned to the Foreign Office in Colombo and given a dressing down.

He was told that the Dutch government gives a pittance of two million dollars and has the gumption to tell the Sri Lankans how to behave.

He was told that if the Dutch have any complaints they should make representations through normal diplomatic channels and not make offensive public statements against the government of Sri Lanka. The lame excuse of the Dutch Ambassador was that they were merely responding to the pressures of the (hypocritical) “civil society” at home.

Dr. Ahmadinejad’s impending visit also has a great significance to Sri Lanka’s foreign relations. He is now taking on the mantle of speaking up for the nations fighting for their rights. He is down grading US like the way US is demonizing Iran. He has dismissed the US dollar as mere paper after switching over to euros as his means of exchange.

His visit to Sri Lanka comes at a time when the West is attempting to twist the arms of Sri Lanka with its obsequious hired agents in the NGOs and some anti-Sri Lankan hired hacks in leading media.

Rightly or wrongly, Malaysia’s Mahathir earlier was the only leader of the non-Western world who had the guts to challenge the arrogance and the monopoly of power in the West. Of course, George Soros, the mega multi-millionaire, undercut him by triggering the Asian melt down.

But that was only a temporary set back.

It should be remembered that Wickremesinghe too boasted of how he went with his begging bowl to Soros and invited him to invest in Sri Lanka. He didn’t get a penny from him. Dr. Ahamadinejad is coming with almost a $700 million investment. So with whom should Hakeem be? And with whom should the Muslims be?

Hakeem is trying to bluff his way through by going to Mecca to impress that he has the interests of Muslim and Islam at heart. But his alliance with pro-West Wickremesinghe says otherwise. Will Mahathir or Dr. Ahamadinejad ever go down to the level of seeking membership with IDU, let alone becoming its regional head? Also, Wickremesinghe has traveled the world over and grabbed every photo opportunity to pose with Bush, Blair and others in the anti-Muslim IDU. How many times has he visited Iran or talked to the Arabs involved in the Middle East conflict?

Even Jimmy Carter, the former President of USA, has met the Syrian President and the Hamas leaders.

Wickremesinghe has no record of building special ties with Muslim countries. Nor has he stood out as a protector of Muslims persecuted by the West. His interest in the Muslims, like Hakeem’s, is to get their votes and then give them the karapincha treatment. Hakeem’s alliance with Wickremesinghe can be as productive as a buffalo mating with a donkey.

When Wickremesinghe begins his campaign in the east he will be talking to the Muslims about their aspirations their interests. Presumably, he will be visiting Saddam Hussein village.

Since he had access to the White House has he ever told his buddy, Bush, that his invasion of Iraq on cooked up evidence was unacceptable to him? Did he have the guts to tell Bush when he met him in his Oval Office, or when he meets his ambassador in Colombo, that America, driven by Christian fundamentalism of Bush, is aiding and abetting the persecution of Muslims?

As one of the heads of the IDU has he ever spoken openly about the failure of the West to recognize the democratically elected heads of Hamas? So how can Hakeem fight under the UNP symbol and ask the Muslims to vote for Wickremesinghe who is seen as one of the figures leading the global campaign against the Muslims?

Hakeem’s unholy alliance with Wickremesinghe is anathema to all communities, just not the Muslims. The reality is that all three communities who are equally divided in the east have a stake in its future.

The Tamils, who aspire to integrate the east into their elusive Eelam, will resent the rise of the Hakeem with his focus on consolidating his position in the east.

If the TNA has any political nouse they should view Wickremesinghe-Hakeem combination as a permanent threat to their claims to the east. The Muslims, on their part, view both Sinhala and Tamil communities as obstacles to their claim to carve out the east as their exclusive domain.

The Sinhalese too fear that Wickremesinghe, by tying up with both communities, would go for another CFA handing over the east to one or the other.

He doesn’t care which as long as he can get votes. After the ill-fated CFA in which Wickremesinghe donated the east to Prabhakaran the Sinhala community is wary of Wickremsinghe’s agreement with minority communities. They have a genuine fear, after the grim experiences of the CFA, that they are the ones who will have to face the bullets and the harassment of the dominant community in the east.

All said and done, the big question for the Muslims is this: where does Hakeem and Wickremesinghe stand in relation to the global and national interests of the Muslims? How genuine are both in fighting to protect the interests of the Muslims?

Can Hakeem fight under the UNP symbol and ask the Muslims to vote for Wickremesinghe who is seen as one of the leading partners in the global campaign against the Muslims?

Hakeem’s political and personal links to Wickremesinghe makes him an enemy of Islam and the Muslims in the global context.

No Muslim who is committed to the cause of Palestinians or the Middle East can vote for the Hakeem-Wickremesinghe alliance. With each bomb that falls in the Middle-East Wickremesinghe says:

“Allahu Bush!” (“Bush is great”!). And Hakeem says: “Allahu Wickremesinghe!” Hakeem scratches Wickremesinghe back and Wickremesinghe scratches Bush’s back.

Both are tied to each other like two bulls yoked to the same cart going up the lawns in the White House.

How many Muslims will want a ride in this cart?