A Reading inside the Thesis of Imam Khomeini On "Jerusalem International Day"

Nihad al-Sheikh Khalil

It is not the intention of this essay to examine explicitness of Islamic performance in Palestine, Iran, Lebanon or other areas that influence the struggle arena. In fact, the objective is to peruse some of the hidden contents of the "Jerusalem Day" initiation that cropped up from Iran –in the wake of the great victory- to represent one of the interconnecting lines with Palestine and an expression of the Islamic stance presence, after quite a long absence.

The first thing we notice in this concern is the cautiousness and the remark which some display, considering the "Jerusalem Day" a mere catch word that emerged in a moment of vehemence, which soon smothered, after its power and its instigating potency had been used up. Some may correlate this initiation with the cover which the revolution and the new regime thereof needs, to extend to the Arabian arena.

With regard to this remark, I would briefly say that it would have expressed a true reality had this initiation (Jerusalem Day) sprung up from policy adits and lobbies. But, having been launched directly by Imam Al Khomeini, who enjoys a firmly established stance towards Palestine which endows him the honesty that refutes such remarks, along with his approach, which is far form launching catch words, as had his approach in practicing transmutational deeds proved, whether before or after the revolution.

Indeed, Imam Khomeini's initiation, relating to "Jerusalem Day" may not have acquired methods and means of expression that uplift its performance in an effective manner, especially when some circles chose to deal with "Jerusalem Day" as a matter that denotes a symbolic entity of intensive imports, while we notice that the initiation transcends catch-words materialism and symbolic signification to the thesis level, though the latter still lacks means of expression and suitable instruments as well.

From a Catch Word to a Thesis

The most dangerous of all attempts that try to abort the initiation of "Jerusalem International Day" –other than the afore said cautiousness and circumspections- is revealed by the behavior of some, and by the attempts of others to reduce this initiation to the catch word level, though the significance of a catch word in moving and in mobilizing the public in the confrontation battle with the Zionist enemy is great.

Any researcher, looking thoroughly at the Al Imam Khomeini's provisions that environ the question, clearly perceives that "Jerusalem Day" is an expression of an Islamic thesis that mobilizes peoples of the body politic, focuses their Jihad (their holy war) on one particular cause and proceeds from a particular identity.

Yet, this talk –in its turn- remains at the catch word if no analytic effort is made to uncover the content and objectives thereof. At the analytic level we could indicate the following points:

1.            Any march normally lasts and retains its acting and granting ability through its thesis more than through anything else, and had it been preordained for Imam Khomeini to tackle the cause of Palestine and that of Jerusalem through the performance of technical tools and systems he would have become –through this presentation of his- a new number that would be added to the other numbers, existent in the arena of this cause.

But having chosen to strike on the nation's dogmatic chord, Imam Khomeini made efforts to remind the body politic of Jerusalem's high rank in its history and in its life, so as to restore its sought-after international civilizational role. This in itself transcends catch words and surpasses technical institutional presentations to get to the thesis level, or else how easy would it have been for the Islamic Revolution –amid victory ardency- to form a resistance front that reflects its tendencies and directions in such a way that its (the Islamic Revolution's) stance would not go beyond adding a further militant faction to the already existent ones as had some regimes done to prove their well attended presence on the Palestinian arena.

Yet, Iran turned away from this technique because Imam Khomeini was much grater than a faction and because he well knew that the "march" persists when it relies on a thesis –as an element. More basic and more effective than anything else- exactly as is the role of the Koran which is a thesis that inspires the Islamic march in all its stages and manifestations.

2.            Based on the aforesaid, we see that a thesis acquires a power that reacts with the people's consiousness and expectations more than systems, parties and institutions do. Furthermore, factions' performance –specially at the level of a cause such as the Palestinian cause, which has witnessed numerous forms of trafficking- as a working thesis that mobilizes the nation, within the frame of a definite identity is more than a technical system for running the work and the struggle, and is too wide to be restricted to the performance of executive systems in a struggle.

Yet, this does not mean incapacitation of the systems' role in as much as it means rectification of the location thereof in the struggle operation against the enemy, because the arena was in no need for additional systems or factions or even organizations in as much as it needed a firm ground, on the basis of which the struggle structure against the enemy is set up.

Here, specifically lies the Imam Khomeini's successfulness and creativity in his interaction with the nation via the thesis scope until such time comes, when the chance for setting up struggle systems becomes feasible, namely after the reaction has taken place and in accordance with the practical requirements of confrontation, provided that this is carried out by the masses themselves, because when the rank and file react with the thesis, the will for action is moved, leading to a new actuality, which dictates setting up of work systems. This is exactly what had happened in most of the activities which moved within the Islamic sphere on the Palestinian arena, and became clearer though the blessed "Intifada", which witnessed devisal of a variety of working tools and means that ensure continuation of the struggle.

3.            Through accurate theoretical and field analysis we deduce that the current and historical frame of the crisis of what is known as the Palestinian Arab Liberation Movement lies in its lack of an effective thesis that grants the struggle a special identity which maintains a fixed line. This plight could be clearly notices in any analysis –no matter how simplified this analysis is- of what the arena has witnessed as from June 1967 up till this present day, passing by the main stops, such as October 1973 war, Sadat's visit to Jerusalem, invasion of Lebanon, outburst of the first Intifada (1987), the series of retrogressions that followed Madrid Conference and Oslo Agreements up to the outbreak of Al Aqsa Intifada in September 2002.

Political subordination itself –despite its seriousness and causation to much of what we are witnessing now- is disordered or is at least attached to a deeper plight, represented by lack of falter of identity, or in avoiding to choose one. Therefore, absenting of Islam –as an identity- at the level of regimes, and at the level of the nation's general movement is what has hit a mortal spot in the body of the nation. is not Palestine an example of that?

This point, together with the other aforesaid ones, bring us back to "Jerusalem Day" as a thesis and as an alternative to the current pickle.

4.            From a civilizational, motional and experiential angle –in the course of the society's movement and civilization- we see that the thesis –as it stands- is an intellectual and ideological system based on a group of well established facts in the nation's consciousness and history, and is more effective than anything else in elucidating the struggle movement.

It is true that the work of systems may fructify quickly, but this fruit would not exceed being a candent flame that immediately fades and goes out. On the other hand, a thesis interacts in time and the movement grows and develops to produce its executive and technical systems and tools in a way that suits the conciousness of the nation, the needs of the conflict and the state of affairs, way from bureaucratic accumulation and administrative flaccidity that absorb the resistance powers in the struggle.

The more the thesis is bound to the nation's identity and to the content of its intellectual and ideological belongingness, the more it could give, act and push in the direction of movement, due to the consonance it provides between the nation and the nation's doctrine.

5.            On basis of the afore mentioned factors, we were surprised neither with the augmenting Islamic activeness inside Palestine, nor with the outburst of the Intifada with its Islamic identity and catch words. In fact, we were rather anticipating it.

It was a must that the "Jerusalem Day" thesis would ripen as a striking trasmutational Sunna (norm), that has its great influence and impact as is the case with other thesis that are deep-rooted in the nation's history, ideology and consciousness. The Islamic action has set out to be a natural outcome of the current Islamic achievement, and the "Al Intifadah" has emerged as a legitimate daughter thereof.

It would have been strange and perturbing, had the Islamic action not emanated the "Al Intifadah". The Islamic action is definitely upcoming, and its definiteness is not of the pattern of machinery necessitarianism, about which the evanescent Marxism talks, depending on a social and historical analytic approach, because that necessitarianism is time worn and effaced. The necessitarianism we meant is that willful response to the deep inveterate Sunnas (norms) that control the theses' movement, springing from the first Prophetical lineage which was witnessed by Adam (God's blessings be on him) and ending up with the Islamic thesis which is the final.

Capabilities Of The Thesis And Features Thereof

The Islamic thesis has great potentialities in struggle administration, and prior to that, in mobilization of the nation and in detonating a real confrontation with the enemy. This confrontation ends up in rectification of the tense Islamic situation.

To uncover those capabilities and features we have to tackle the following points:

A.           An Islamic thesis can theoretically and practically –by itself- face the enemy on the ground and inside the struggle arena, depending on its Islamic understanding and its political consciousness which originates from an Islamic perspective, more efficiently and effectively that any other legitimate mean. To explain this we perceive that the Zionist entity –in justifying its steps, its stances and its plans- leans so much on religious logic to the effect that it is carrying out the Talmud precepts, and that this entity is now drowned to its ears in the Talmud phenomenon, and consequently can not separate itself from its Talmud and Torah despite all its secular institutions.

What we mean by Torah here is not God's revealed words to His prophet Moses, we mean the falsified speech that has built up throughout a long history of forgery. Therefore, we are facing an astounding paradox: Israel is confronting us with Torah catch words and Torah texts whereas we raise secular catch words in its face.

What a misery we are living in! to face a deep-rooted religious phenomenon with secular catch words! Why don't official regimes and cadres take up an analogous confrontational logic? We are not to deal here with the already known answer, but we are interested in confirming that the Islamic thesis-alone- was able to put an end to the Torah phenomenon , with which the enemy is armed, and has done so by arming the nation with the Quranic phenomenon as a confrontation mean and as a substitute. As such, we can erect a solid reinforced basis to replace the current conspicuous and collapsing situation.

B.            An Islamic thesis has the potentialities to rectify the civilizational balance, first by helping the nation to discover itself and second by urging this nation to take up its leading role which God's Book (The Holy Qura'n) had defind as being "Central". We therefore find that no technical or political approach –no matter how successful it is- could mount up to the same civilizational level which the Islamic thesis provides, because civilization can not be established but on cosmic and universal values and can not be launched but on ground of a great political achievement.

C.           The "International Jerusalem Day" thesis –in its capacity as a function that intensifies the Islamic understanding and stance- has restituted to Jerusalem and to Palestine, their central position in the confrontation between the nation and enemies thereof.

The battle inside Jerusalem, for Jerusalem and on the way thereto is a symbol that intensifies the open and comprehensive civilizational struggle between the haughty western forces and the Zionist movement on the one hand and the Islamic and liberational powers and movements that are spread all over our Arab and Islamic world on the other hand. It is a continual confrontation that will never end unless the injustice and occupation night mare is moved from upon our oppressed Palestine people's chest, and from upon the chests of all the peoples of the area.

The Islamic Revolution Embodies The Thesis Of Al Imam Khomeini **

Following the victory of "The Islamic Revolution" in Iran, and as per the catch word raised by Al Imam Khomeini: "Iran today and Palestine tomorrow", which was hailed and iterated by the Iranian masses, defending Palestine became one of the Iranian foreign policy priorities, the bases of which were laid by Al Imam in a statement that disclosed the Iranian Revolution's vision of the Israeli danger on the Iranian and Arab security, where the statement said: "The aim of the imperialistic big powers from creating Israel is not only to occupy Palestine. All the Arab countries will meet the same fate if Israel is given the chance". ^[1]

One of the first decisions taken by the revolutionary government in Iran during the first few days following the Islamic revolution's victory was replacement of the Zionist entity's embassy in Tehran by a Palestinian one. This decision –together with the decision of breaking-off relations with the Zionist entity- were the first political measures that created a boom in the whole area, whereas the Shah's regime used to supply 60% of the Zionist entity's oil needs. The Zionists and the Shah were the spearhead of the American policy in the face of the Soviet Union in the Middle East area.

The Iranian researcher "Zamil Sai'di" pointed out that some Palestinians did not comprehend this Islamic revolutionary stance, and the enjoined (Iraqi-Iranian) war uncovered a bitter situation, where priority was given to national considerations that are built on fanaticism at the expense of Islamic considerations and unrestricted international orientation thereof, nothing that this orientation looks at Moslems for being Moslems wherever they are.

Many Iranians felt deeply frustrated because fanatic emotions out weighed Islamic interests. Never the less, this feeling did not go beyond its limits, nor did it infiltrate the Moslem Iranian people strong believe in justice and fairness of the Palestinian cause and in the necessity of defending it, being a holy Islamic land that has incurred aggression and usurpation. For them, the Palestinian cause forms a strategic axis for the whole Islamic nation.[2]

This was a consequence of a fundamental stance announced on a certain occasion by Al Imam Al Khumainy, where he said: "… I clearly and openly announce to Arab and Islamic countries' presidents and to the whole world as well, that Moslem leaders and Iran's believing people, together with the lofty Iranian army have close and true brotherly ties with Arab peoples and with Islamic countries, with which we share good and bad times…. I hereby take the opportunity to announce our condemnation of the monarchal authority's alliance with Israel, which is the enemy of Islam and Iran.[3]

Choosing the fourth Friday of the month of Ramadan to announce the "Jerusalem Day" has formed an opportunity to confirm the Islamic Republic leaders' obligation towards the Palestinian cause. This is what Al Imam stressed when he said that "Jerusalem Day is an international occasion and does not pertain to Jerusalem only…. It is the confrontation day between the oppressed and the arrogant dictators…. It is the day whence we should spring to save Jerusalem and our Lebanese brothers from tyranny and injustice… we have to forewarn all the big powers to unhand and to let alone the oppressed peoples…. Israel is the enemy of mankind and humanity…. Jerusalem Day is not only Palestine day…. It is the day of Islam…. It is the day on which the Islamic republic's banner must flap high in all countries…. It is the day on which we must tell the big powers that they can no more progress into Islamic countries.[4]

The Imam Ayat Allah Al Sayed Ali Khamenai (the present spiritual advisor of the Iranian Islamic Republic) confirmed that "Jerusalem Day is the day on which the nation's inflamed sentiments should coalesce in support of the Palestinian cause. Those sentiments and feelings shall be utilized to solve the Palestinian question…. And as a people that considers its fate correlated to that of Palestine, we wish to mobilize our powers and capabilities for liberating Jerusalem".[5]

His Eminence Ayat Allah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (chief of the Regime's Interests Determining Council) had also pointed out that "the objective of the faithful revolutionary people of Iran does not stop at the limits of catch words and publicity. Announcement of the last Friday of the month of Ramadan to be "Jerusalem Day" aimed at unifying Islamic peoples and countries more than any time before. Islamic peoples and countries must be prepared for Jihad (the Holy War) so as to regain the rights of the Palestinian people and to defeat the imperialistic Zionist enemy".[6]

It is worth mentioning here that at this stage of the Iranian-Palestinian relations there are no more gaps or contradictions between the official governmental stance and that of the Iranian people. In fact, they fully agree on supporting the Palestinian people's struggle and on resisting the Zionist entity, together with its regional and international allies. It was assured that Iranians consider Palestine and the cause thereof a uniting and consolidating factor for Arabs and Iranians. A researcher summarized this by saying: "The Palestinian cause appears as a gathering and integration factor for the whole Islamic nation and it is natural –therefore_ to look at it as a means of gathering Arabs and Iranians, as they both adhere to the banner of Islam. What proves correctness of this saying is the following:

1^st: Arabs perceive the Palestinian question as their own national cause, while Moslems consider it their most significant cause because it embraces their First Kiblah (Al Aqsa Mosque) and no body accepts usurpation thereof. Consequently, when the cause is one, and the vision there around is concordant, those interested therein would become on one side whether they like it or not.

2^nd: Sameness of the dangers relating to the Palestinian cause makes Iranians, Arabs and other Moslems hold tightly together. A quick look would disclose the dangers of Zionism and its arrogant protectors that threaten the Islamic world.

3^rd: Sameness of exposure, meaning that all Arab and Islamic countries are targeted by powers that seek to plunder the wealths of this area one way or another. Those powers accuse Iran –for example- of nuclear armament and terrorism. They threaten to punish it for one simple reason, i.e. to dissuade it from opposing the solutions they intend to impose in Palestine. Those same powers threaten to reduce or even to stop monetary aids to Egypt. They talk about punishing it if it insists that the Zionist entity signs the "counter proliferation of nuclear weapons treaty" when Arab countries are called to sign it.[7]

The Israeli leadership claims that the Islamic revolution leaders do not differentiate between a Jew and an Israeli.

Anyhow, the truth is that leaders of this revolution –through out their declarations and speeches, and based on the Iranian Revolution's constitutional texts- confirmed that there is a difference between a Jew and a Zionist, adding that an Iranian Jew may change into a Zionist if he practices any activities against Iran, that may serve the Zionist entity's interests.

·               Source: The Kuwaiti "Al Rai Al Amm" newspaper- 10.02.1999.

·               Source: A study prepared by Ma'moun Kiwan under the heading: "Iran and Palestine: Roots and facts of relationship" – Shuoun Arabiya (Arab Affairs) magazine – Issue No 106 – June 2001.

Footnotes: