The decree, which also strips citizenship from individuals who obtained it through him by affiliation, is part of a long-running campaign targeting what authorities call “fraudulent” or “forged” nationality cases.

A Government Sweep to “Safeguard Identity”

The decision, issued under Decree No. 227 of 2025, was signed at Al-Sief Palace and approved by Kuwait’s cabinet following recommendations from the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior. Kuwaiti media have described the move as one element in a broader “clean-up” of the population registry.

Officials say more than 50,000 citizenships have been revoked over the past two years as the government attempts to strengthen national identity, social cohesion, and security.

Authorities maintain that these revocations are essential to combating falsification of documents, protecting state resources, and preventing what they describe as destabilising ideological influences.

A Preacher Who Divided Public Opinion

Tareq Al-Suwaidan is a well-known religious media figure and author whose motivational lectures have gained a significant following across the Gulf. Educated in the United States, he rose to prominence through books, leadership seminars and Islamic programming.

However, Al-Suwaidan’s political affiliations have long been contentious. He has repeatedly been described by regional commentators as linked to the Muslim Brotherhood — a characterisation he has acknowledged in public speeches, according to reports.

In 2013, Arab News reported that Saudi businessman Prince Alwaleed bin Talal dismissed Al-Suwaidan as director of the satellite network Al-Resalah, accusing him of “extremist inclinations” and political affiliation with the Brotherhood.

The prince’s office said Suwaidan had identified himself as “one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood” during a lecture in Yemen.

Saudi authorities later banned various books and recordings associated with him as part of their post-2014 crackdown on Islamist literature.

MEMRI: Calls to Pressure Politicians

A November 2023 report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), citing an online video, said Al-Suwaidan had urged young Muslims in the West to become politically active and “pressure politicians to change their stance”.

MEMRI’s archived analysis framed these statements as consistent with his history of leadership-training seminars aimed at mobilising youth.

While supporters describe his speeches as motivational, critics argue that such rhetoric suggests attempts to influence political outcomes and shape public policy through ideological pressure.

Why Kuwait Acted Now

Although the Kuwaiti decree provides limited detail, analysts point to existing nationality laws that permit revocation in cases of forged documentation, non-disclosure of affiliation, or activities judged harmful to state security.

Officials have broadly framed their campaign as a response to “undesirable affiliations”, emphasising Kuwait’s responsibility to protect its internal stability.

Commentators in local media argue that such measures act as guardrails against divisive movements and imported political agendas, particularly amid regional tensions over political Islam.

Supporters of the decision contend that revoking Al-Suwaidan’s citizenship strengthens Kuwait’s stability and reinforces the government’s role in upholding “social cohesion, religious moderation, and long-term security.”

They argue that nationality laws must remain firm to prevent exploitation and ensure Kuwait remains shielded from external ideological conflicts that have destabilised neighbouring states.

Maududi’s views continue to influence thousands of Islamist militants worldwide.

The 29^th of August 1966, a man who had the most significant influence on modern Jihadism and the one who considered Sayyid Abul-Ala Maududi to be a ‘great Muslim’, was executed for ‘plotting to overthrow’ the Egyptian regime. Syed Qutb was not the only prominent Muslim to hold Maududi in such high regard. From kings and head of states to the board scholars and thinkers, Syed enjoyed respect and support, but also suffered persecution and lengthy imprisonments. This article will look at controversies of his legacy. And whether he can be held morally responsible for crimes committed in the name of the Ideology he defended all his life.

Like other Muslim thinkers, Maududi was born to a middle-class Muslim family settled in Hyderabad, part of British controlled India. He started his learning journey from homeschooling where he excelled in Arabic language and entry-level Islamic disciplines. By the age of 11, he was able to translate fine modern Arabic literature into Urdu. One of his early influencers was Iranian Philosopher Mulla Sarda, including the concept of the necessity of Sharia to the bettering of individual Muslims and societies, (Hasan, 1984).

By the age of 16, when his father passed away. He interrupted his learning and moved to Delhi, where he enhanced his reading and built up only multidisciplinary education he had between Aurangabad and Hyderabad. Maududi adopted a comparative approach showing interest and appreciation for the rise of Europe. Attributed in his opinion to the work of the philosopher, and blaming Muslim scholars for not doing enough to enlighten the Ummah.

He restored his studies and obtained a license in Islamic studies, yet he never sees himself a scholar:

He said, “I do not have the prerogative to belong to the class of Ulema. I am a man of the middle cadre, who has imbibed something from both the systems of education, the new and the old; and has gathered my knowledge by traversing both paths. By virtue of my inner light, I conclude that neither the old school nor the new is totally in the right”.

Before returning to Hyderabad in 1928, he worked as editor of the influential and anti-British Al-Jamia newspaper. In his native district, he witnessed what he described as the decline of Islamic moral and inclination towards secularism. This fear probably shaped his politics and the way he perceived the need for change. Undoubtedly, Maududi was a sincere and humble person who witnessed enormous political and social changes taking place in India and the Islamic world. Not even the creation of Pakistan satisfied his eagerness to see Islam’s might as he read about it in the book of History.

His frustration in seeing the non-Muslim West progressing in science and humanism, compared to the Muslim world’s decline into poverty and political volatility. It was probably behind his reaching out to the broad Muslim world where he taught and learned theories about Islam, philosophy and politics. However, Maududi was never regarded as a man of peace. Years after his death, his views are said to be behind most of the political and violent Islam in modern days.

In one of His books called: A reminder for the caller to Islam, Maududi laydown his views in both spiritual and operational guidance for modern Islamic militancy. Setting objectives for his global view of Islam’s awakening, the book is not for a general audience. It could be not very easy to comprehend even for an educated Muslim who doesn’t believe in political and religious activism. The book calls for ‘migration to Allah’ a concept embraced by all Islamic groups in modern days from Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt to The Islamic State group in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere, (Faruqi, 1968).

This ‘doctrine takes its routes from Historical migration of the Prophet Mohammed PBUH, from Mecca to Medina to flee persecution and preserve the faith. Mawdudi builds on that event and its wisdom, considering that everything the Prophet PBUH did or said, is a source of knowledge and guidance for every Muslim.

The migration doesn’t take place necessarily by moving from a location to another, as in verse: “And I will leave you and those you invoke other than Allah and will invoke my Lord. I expect that I will not be in invocation to my Lord, unhappy.” (Quran, 19:48). Prophet Ibrahim tells his father about his intention to isolate himself from his people, for disagreement with their beliefs.

Calling Migration to Allah is perceived as one of the stages in the struggle for the call to Islam. In a liberal society, this can be seen as a matter of personal choice. However, this type of isolations in communities where families and friends play the central role in Muslim’s lives. The implications can bring the militant to spend more time segregated with other members who have the same ideology, which leads to more radicalization.

When Jamaa replaces family and tribe, loyalty to the group likely to take priority over the society and the country. Two extreme examples of how this doctrine can lead to disasters are:

• Al-Takfīr was al-Hijrah: Where the word migration explains half of its ideology. Members of this group ended up believing anyone who is not joining them is an apostate, who’s life money and relatives become the lawful target. Isolating themselves from society without physically leaving the country (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020).
• The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: After they fled incarceration, founders of this group called for every Muslim to practice the duty of ‘Hijra’. Migrate to the territory under their control, this call was according to the binding to every Muslim which misled thousands to join them, 

In another instance, Maududi praised Japanese Kamikazes telling his audience of Islamist militants and students that that was the spirit they needed to serve the cause of Dawaa better. The words of the scholar known for his opposition to violence against innocents did set another controversial expansionist agenda for his concept of the Islamic state.

Maududi wrote: “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam, regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard-bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet…. because the entire mankind should benefit from the ideology and welfare programme [of Islam] … Towards this end, Islam wishes to press into service all forces which can bring about a revolution and a composite term for the use of all these forces is ‘Jihad’…. the objective of the Islamic ‘jihad’ is to eliminate the rule of a un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule”.

Maududi’s views continue to influence thousands of Islamist militants worldwide, his scholarly competence was compromised by changes to geopolitics during and after his lifetime. He may have had noble intentions in serving Islam, Muslims and humanity in his time and beyond. Unfortunately, he didn’t take into consideration that his work can be taken out of context (Robinson and Nasr, 1998).

Jassem Tamim is originally from Morocco, settled in United Kingdom. He holds MA degree in Terrorism and Security from King’s College London. He is currently doing PhD research in Digital Counter-Radicalization.

“Yes, our roots are in Muslim Brotherhood. We were and still are Muslim Brotherhood”, Mashal said. “Iran has helped us with weapons and technology. And everyone who helped us, we thank him”.

Muslim Brotherhood is an extremist group founded in Egypt in 1928. The key-backers of the group are Qatar and Turkey, however, as of 2015 the group was declared as a terrorist organization by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Russia, and Bahrain.

The group’s literature designed by Syed Qutb and Hassan al-Banna is considered as the foundational work for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Abul Ala Maududi is to “Political Islam” what Karl Marx was to Communism

Abul Ala Maududi (1903-1979) was an Islamic theologian, a prolific author, and the founder of the political Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami (JI).

Maududi’s theories helped form the tenets of Qutbism, an ideology that is believed to have influenced numerous violent extremist offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood including Takfir and Hijrah, al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram and Alshabab.

Maududi insisted that sharia (Hakimya) would eradicate what he referred to as modern jahiliyya, the state of ignorance afflicting the world’s Muslims. Such modern jahiliyya in the form of socialism, secularism, or liberal democracy.

According to Maududi, the only way to defend against jahiliyya was to Islamize society, first by introducing Islamic regulation to politics and economy, and eventually the entire state.

Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb went on to popularize these notions in the 1960s.

In 1960, Maududi wrote in his book The Islamic Law and Constitution about his vision of an Islamic state where “no one can regard any field of his affairs as personal and private”.

Al Hakimya (الحاكمية) The totalitarianism of God’s sovereignty, Maududi wrote, would “bear a resemblance to the Fascist and Communist states”.

Scholars have adopted the term Islamic-Fascism (Islamist Fascism) or Islamofascism, to describe Maududi’s and others’ Islamist vision.

Saudi Scholar Salih AlFawzan warned of the Hakimya and indicated it is a ploy used by the partisans to serve the agendas of their parties (Muslim Brotherhood).

To most Pakistanis and to those who have been associated with various Islamist political outfits in countries like Egypt, Indonesia, Syria and Malaysia, Abul Ala Maududi is to “Political Islam” what Karl Marx was to Communism.

Maududi’s ideas were eventually adopted by General Ziaul Haq, who had pulled off a successful military coup in July 1977 and then invited Maududi to help him shape policies to help make Pakistan a “true Islamic country” run on “Nizam-e-Mustafa”.

In a way Ziaul Haq was the Pakistani Gamal Abdel Nasser, in the sense he adapted a more contained policy against the Jamaat-e-Islami as Abdul Nasser did with the MB in the beginning of his reign.

To understand more about the Pakistani Geopolitics and President Ziaul Haq refer to the news articles and books between the 70s to late 80s as it will give variable points of views on the Geopolitics of Pakistan and the region at the time.

Khaled Homoud Alshareef holds PhD in Business and he earned Masters in Philosophy. He writes for MilliChronicle about Islamism, Islamist factions and modern Terrorism. He tweets under @0khalodi0.

Why the Ottoman-family built such a great lodge and what’s their connection with Freemasons…

I wasn’t surprised when I heard that “Turkey’s Erdogan is a Freemason belonging to Dömneh secret society”, claimed by Serbian-Yugoslavian Researcher Dejan Lučić.

I have been quite fascinated by these topics for the past 20 years, and in fact I visited the grand Masonic lodge in Hyderabad in 2003, built by the Nizam, father of son-in-law of last Ottoman Sultan Abdulmejid II.

Inside the lodge, I saw David-Stars all over the walls, and various writings in Hebrew, Urdu and Persian languages.

After witnessing the lodge, I was quite inquisitive why the Ottoman-family built such a great lodge and what’s their connection with Freemasons.

After few days, I visited Salarjung Museum of Hyderabad to find some content for the research, and the “Founder’s Gallery” is as clear as the sky that—Nizam was 33rd Degree Freemason. All his attires, special ritualistic swords, and pictures are on public display.

Coincidentally, Adnan Oktar aka Harun Yahya was quite famous those days, and I got my new multimedia computer the same year. So to enjoy the new machine, I used to watch his documentaries and read his books.

There were two books on this subject—”Global Freemasonry” and “The Knight Templars”.

Oktar, who is now a top freemason, dedicated third chapter of the book Global Freemasonry about the rampant masonic presence in Turkey in every system of the society.

In 2015, a video clip of Dr. Raslan of Egypt was viral, where he read official documents in public to expose the connections between Freemasons and Muslim Brotherhood or Ikhwanul-Muslimeen.

He quoted Tharwat Kharbawi, former freemason and brotherhood member—who wrote about how the formation and working pattern of MB was laid by Freemasons.

The famous Rabia hand-symbol glorified by Erdogan during 2013 Egypt protests, flashed my mind. Interestingly, the hand symbol was claimed by Masonic groups.

Further, the deception and fraud by MB and Erdogan is quite known to the Muslim world, how MB collaborated with the Obama regime to engineer the so-called “Arab Spring” in Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, Bahrain, and Yemen, and tried their hands to mess-up with Saudi Arabia as well, however they lost to the Saudi Security forces and its backing in Bahrain and Egypt.

Erdogan’s deception is evident. On one hand he criticizes Israel, but on the other hand he venerates the grave of Theodore Herzel, founder of modern Zionism.

He calls for Israel’s destruction, and keeps Israeli embassy open in Istanbul.

He calls for the rights of Palestinians, but allows Israelis to get a “free” on-arrival visa, and stay in Turkey for 90-days, while Palestinians have to pay.

He calls for Israel’s destruction, but sends them medical aid and permits their cargo planes.

The list of Erdogan’s deceptions can continue.

The major sign of “Dajjal” is deception, since his name is derived from Dajal which means to fake-up and hide the reality, and this is one of the signs of Dajjalian forces—they work under the facáde. They keep the people busy with their outward claims and work keenly on their sinister agendas.

It seriously upsets me, when I see  people getting easily swayed away by Erdogan and his deceptive agenda, and the kids getting overtly excited by the “return of Ottoman Caliphate in 2023”.

Wake-up from the slumber and see yourself, the real enemy is presented to you as Messiah, and the real friends are character-assasinated day-in and day-out, and don’t fall for the ulterior motives of deceptive forces. Wake up!

He was also angered by the burning of his image and the destruction of a statue of the republic’s late founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Tehran (Reuters) – After days of protests across Iran last month, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appeared impatient. Gathering his top security and government officials together, he issued an order: Do whatever it takes to stop them.

That order, confirmed by three sources close to the supreme leader’s inner circle and a fourth official, set in motion the bloodiest crackdown on protesters since the Islamic Revolution in 1979.

About 1,500 people were killed during less than two weeks of unrest that started on Nov. 15. The toll, provided to Reuters by three Iranian interior ministry officials, included at least 17 teenagers and about 400 women as well as some members of the security forces and police.

The toll of 1,500 is significantly higher than figures from international human rights groups and the United States. A Dec. 16 report by Amnesty International said the death toll was at least 304. The U.S. State Department, in a statement to Reuters, said it estimates that many hundreds of Iranians were killed, and has seen reports that number could be over 1,000.

The figures provided to Reuters, said two of the Iranian officials who provided them, are based on information gathered from security forces, morgues, hospitals and coroner’s offices.

The government spokesman’s office declined to comment on whether the orders came from Khamenei and on the Nov. 17 meeting. Iran’s mission to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

What began as scattered protests over a surprise increase in gasoline prices quickly spread into one of the biggest challenges to Iran’s clerical rulers since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

By Nov. 17, the second day, the unrest had reached the capital Tehran, with people calling for an end to the Islamic Republic and the downfall of its leaders. Protesters burned pictures of Khamenei and called for the return of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of the toppled Shah of Iran, according to videos posted on social media and eye witnesses.

That evening at his official residence in a fortified compound in central Tehran, Khamenei met with senior officials, including security aides, President Hassan Rouhani and members of his cabinet.

At the meeting, described to Reuters by the three sources close to his inner circle, the 80-year-old leader, who has final say over all state matters in the country, raised his voice and expressed criticism of the handling of the unrest. He was also angered by the burning of his image and the destruction of a statue of the republic’s late founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

“The Islamic Republic is in danger. Do whatever it takes to end it. You have my order,” the supreme leader told the group, one of the sources said.

Khamenei said he would hold the assembled officials responsible for the consequences of the protests if they didn’t immediately stop them. Those who attended the meeting agreed the protesters aimed to bring down the regime.

“The enemies wanted to topple the Islamic Republic and immediate reaction was needed,” one of the sources said.

The fourth official, who was briefed on the Nov. 17 meeting, added that Khamenei made clear the demonstrations required a forceful response.

“Our Imam,” said the official, referring to Khamenei, “only answers to God. He cares about people and the Revolution. He was very firm and said those rioters should be crushed.”

Tehran’s clerical rulers have blamed “thugs” linked to the regime’s opponents in exile and the country’s main foreign foes, namely the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia, for stirring up unrest. Khamenei has described the unrest as the work of a “very dangerous conspiracy.”

A Dec. 3 report on Iran’s state television confirmed that security forces had fatally shot citizens, saying “some rioters were killed in clashes.” Iran has given no official death toll and has rejected figures as “speculative.”

“The aim of our enemies was to endanger the existence of the Islamic Republic by igniting riots in Iran,” said the commander-in-chief of the elite Revolutionary Guards Corps, Hossein Salami, last month, according to Iranian media.

The Revolutionary Guards declined to comment for this report.

Iran’s interior minister said on Nov. 27 more than 140 government sites had been set on fire along with hundreds of banks and dozens of petrol stations, while 50 bases used by security forces were also attacked, according to remarks reported by Iran’s state news agency IRNA. The minister said up to 200,000 people took part in the unrest nationwide.

The trial against Mussa and his supporters began in 2016 following an investigation into suspected sympathizers of Islamic State in southern Bulgaria.

Mussa, already serving four years in jail for spreading radical Islam, was sentenced by the regional court in the southern city of Pazardzhik to 8-and-1/2 years.

His supporters, men from the southern towns of Plovdiv, Pazardzhik and Asenovgrad, received jail sentences of between one and 3-and-1/2 years. The only woman in the group got a suspended sentence.

In late 2014, following raids in more than 40 homes and a mosque in southern Bulgaria, investigators discovered a large number of shirts, hats, flags and banners with the logo of the Islamic State.

Prosecutors have said that Mussa, a former Christian of Roma origin who converted to Islam in 2000 while working in Vienna, had preached surrounded by the Islamic State flags. His group had attempted to recruit fighters for the militant group which had at the time seized parts of Syria and Iraq.

Bulgaria supported the U.S.-led coalition fighting Islamic State but has not taken an active military role.

Muslims make up about 12 percent of Bulgaria’s 7 million population and most belong to a centuries-old community, largely ethnic Turks.

The two key concepts these thinkers borrowed from Leninism were the “state” and “revolution”.

Radical and revolutionary Islam, which emerged as reactions to colonialism, were inspired more by socialist values than by liberal democratic values, and they formulated their principles in line with this outlook. It was common in the Islamic world until the 1980s to consider Islam as a source of ideology as well as a revolutionary ideology.

It was particularly the Iranian revolution, which became and inspirational reference for Islamic movements at that time. In this period, Islam was taken by Muslim thinkers of Iranian origin as well as by those of North African origin, almost as a kind of state religion, a revolutionary ideology, and a theocratic political structure.

Such interpretations of Islam can be traced back, in the case of some North African countries, to the period between the second half of the nineteenth century and up to the first half of the twentieth century.

At that point in time, Muslim countries began to suffer a long period of painful setback in the face of the incredible economic growth and development western countries were experiencing. 

Moreover, the colonial ambitions of western countries directly over Islamic territories evoked strong reactions from Muslim thinkers of North Africa who began to think in terms of Leninism. This explains a great deal about the distance, which Muslims began to feel toward liberalism, democracy, capitalism, and other similar systems and ideas.

The two key concepts these thinkers borrowed from Leninism were the “state” and “revolution”. It was in their view, the state that symolized social justice, social unity, and the struggle against the West. Such a state could only be established through revolution, this being under the leadership of a pioneering group.

The works of Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian Islamic intellectual who was hanged by the Nasser regime in 1966, for instance, emphasize the role of a revolutionary group. 

Largely on account of his Leninist background, Qutb envisaged the establishment of an Islamic state by means of a revolution led by a specially trained group versed in Islamic values. The project towards the creation of such a group, indeed, can be seen as an attempt to replace Lenin’s proletariat vanguards with their Muslim counterparts. For Qutb, the salvation of Muslims, as well as the entirety of humanity depended on an Islamic state that would represent a third way, i.e., an alternative to socialism and capitalism.

Although critical of socialism, many Islamic intellectuals, as in the case of Sayyid Qutb, operated on values that might be combined with a Leninist style of state socialism in some form through its emphasis on collective brotherhood, revolution, equality, salvation, a centralized state, anticapitalism, and antidemocracy amongst others.

Hence, both authoritarian regimes and Muslim intellectuals with a first-hand experience of colonial domination completely refused the West, and sought to set up alternative institutions, which were authoritarian in character. 

When realizing the traditional interpretations of Islam fell short of enabling the deployment of adequate means by which to resolve existing problems, they began to borrow concepts and perspectives from Russian socialism, which was anticapitalist and antiliberalist in character, to develop an Islamic myth as an alternative.

Thought the writer is writing from the perspective of explaining the lack of democracy, or opposition to democracy in the Muslim lands, his analysis of the origins of ideologies based upon the notions of “state” and “revolution” and borrowed from Russian Bolshevism are extremely accurate.

This can be seen in the likes of Abu A’la Mawdudi and very clearly in the writings of Sayyid Qutb.

Excerpt taken from Islam and the West, Critical Perspectives on Modernity” (compiled by Michael Thompson), Omer Caha writes (pp. 44-45).

If we can shake the government by inciting conflict between rulers and scholars and disperse capital in these countries and attract capital from their country to ours, we would undoubtedly be very successful because we would cause them to lose these three pillars.

“If we are not able to export our revolution to neighboring Islamic countries, then undoubtedly the culture of these countries, mixed with Western culture, will attack and conquer us.”

Thanks to God and after centuries of brave sacrifice of the nation of the 12 imams in Iran, we are now – according to the revered Shia leaders’ guidance – carrying a heavy and dangerous responsibility: that is, the exportation of revolution.

Based on that, we have to admit that our government, besides its mission in keeping the sovereignty of this country and the people’s rights, is an ideological government. We must make the exportation of the revolution one of our top priorities.

But because of the international status quo and international laws – as generally agreed upon – we cannot export the revolution without facing grave and disastrous consequences.

After three sessions with the semi-consensus of the attendees and committee members, we have implemented a five-year plan, including five stages, each stage lasting 10 years, by which to export our Islamic revolution to neighboring countries with the initial aim of unifying Islam.

This is because the danger we are facing from the Wahhabi rulers and those of Sunni descent is much larger than the danger posed by the East and West because they – the Wahhabis and Sunnis – resist our movement and are the fundamental enemies of the clergy’s guardianship (Wilayat al-Faqih) and the impeccable imams, to the extent that they consider embracing the Shia sect as a religious sect and as a constitution for the country as a matter contrary to custom and Sharia.

Therefore they are dividing Islam into two opposing branches. Accordingly, we must increase our influence over the Sunni territories inside Iran, and especially in the border towns, and increase the number of mosques and Husseiniat and ceremonies of creed more than before. We must provide the atmosphere in the cities that are inhabited by 90-100% Sunnis until scores of Shia are deported from cities and villages of the interior of the country to live and work in these border towns forever. The nation and governmental circles must provide direct protection to these settlers in order to take over the management of cities and social and cultural centers that have previously been controlled by Sunni citizens.

The plan we drew up to export the revolution – in order to avert any reaction from world superpowers – will utilize money that will not be spent without benefit.

The way to establish the pillars of the state: We know that establishing the pillars of each state and sustaining a nation is based on three foundations:

First: the power possessed by the governing authority;

Second: the learning and knowledge of the scholars and researchers;

Third: the economy, which is concentrated in the hands of business leaders.

If we can shake the government by inciting conflict between rulers and scholars and disperse capital in these countries and attract capital from their country to ours, we would undoubtedly be very successful because we would cause them to lose these three pillars.

Regarding the rest of the people, who form 70-80% of the population of each country, they are just followers of power and influence and they are indulged in their way of life earning their livings and providing themselves with shelter. This is why they defend those in power. In order to get to the roof of a house one must begin by stepping on the first rung of the ladder.

Our Sunni and Wahhabi neighbors are Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and some of the Emirates to the south at the entrance of the Persian Gulf that appear to be united on the surface, but the facts are different. For this exact region has a huge impact on the past and the present as it is considered the throat of the earth due to the oil in the region. There is no place in the world as delicate as this region, and their rulers, because of the sale of this oil, have the potential for a better life.

The populations of these regions are divided into three sects:

1. The Bedouin who have been there for hundreds of years.
2. Those who have immigrated from islands and ports which are considered part of our land today. Their immigration began in the era of Isamal al Safawi and continued through the eras of Nader Shah and Karim Khan Zind and the rulers of the Gajar and Bahlawi families, and there was some dispersed immigration at the beginning of the Islamic Revolution.
3. Those from other Arab countries and cities of Iran’s interior.

Trade, and the importing and exporting of goods, as well as construction of buildings is generally controlled by non-citizens; people living in the interior make their living by renting buildings and buying and selling land, while the relatives of those with influence live on salaries earned from the selling of oil.

Most of the citizens of those countries are indulging in a socially and culturally corrupt lifestyle and other acts that are openly contrary to Islam. Many of these people are concerned only with purchasing apartments and shares in factories, depositing the capital in Europe and the United States, and especially in Japan, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Switzerland in fear of the future devastation of their countries.

The control of these countries means the control of the world. To implement the prepared 50-year plan we must, at the outset, foster our relations with our neighboring countries. There must be mutual respect, strong relations, and friendship between us to the degree that our relations will improve even after the war with Iraq and Saddam Hussein’s downfall: the fall of 1000 friends is a much easier burden to bear than the fall of one of our enemies.

With good cultural, political and economic relations between us, many Iranians will immigrate to those countries and through them we can send agents who are apparently immigrants but who, in reality, are working for our regime. Their jobs will be determined as we enlist them into service by sending them abroad.

The influence of our sect, which is enjoyed to some extent in these countries and their circles, was not a plan for just one or two days. Do not think that 50 years is a long time. Our revolution needs a plan that lasts 20 years, and our sect must enjoy a certain amount of influence in many countries and circles.

At that time we did not have any employees or ministers or deputies or rulers, even the Wahhabis, Shafi’ieh, Hanafi, Maliki, Hambali groups were considering us as apostates, and some of the followers of these sects killed the Shia repeatedly. It is true that we did not exist at that time, but our grandfathers did, and our lives today are the fruit of their thoughts, opinions and efforts.

Maybe we will not be here in the future, but our revolution and sect will remain. That is enough to be committed to this creed to sacrifice life, bread, and what we hold dear; but it is also important to have a well-studied program.

We are committed to making plans not for 50 years, but for 500. We are the inheritors of millions of martyrs who have been killed by the Islamist devils (Sunnis). Their blood flows through history since the time of the death of the Prophet.

The blood that has been spilled did not dry, and it will not dry until all Muslims believe in Ali and the Prophet’s family and admit the mistakes of the grandfathers and that Shiism is an ingrained inheritance of Islam.

Important stages along our way:

In the first stage, we do not have a problem spreading our creed in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Iraq and Bahrain. We will make the 10-year plan the first plan in those five countries. That is why it is the responsibility of our immigrant – who are really agents – to carry out the three responsibilities they are charged with:

1) To buy land, houses, and apartments, find jobs and provide the necessities to the sons of our creed and live in these homes, and to increase their numbers.

2) To form relations and friendships with business leaders, factory managers, etc., and especially with businessmen, commercial leaders, and famous people and others who enjoy influence in government circles.

3) In these countries there are scattered villages that are still under construction. There are plans to build scores of villages and small towns where none exist. Agents arriving in the form of immigrants to these countries must buy as many houses in these villages as possible and then sell them at a reasonable price to those who have sold their properties in the city centers. In this way control will be removed from those in densely populated towns and cities.

In the second stage, we must spur the people (Shia) to respect and obey the laws and those who enforce them, as well as government employees; they must obtain official license for their creed and sectarian sermons, building mosques and Husainiat, licenses that will be regarded in the future as official documents. To start businesses and become self-employed they must think of places with a highly dense population to spread their businesses in targeted locations.

The person must, in these two stages, seek the nationality of the country he is living in by taking advantage of friends and giving valuable presents; furthermore, they must encourage the youth to work in government sectors and enlist in the military.

In the second half of the 10-year plan we must secretly and indirectly agitate the Sunnis and the Wahhabi scholars against social corruption and those acts in opposition to Islam that prevail in these countries by distributing critical pamphlets from other countries in the name of the religious authorities. Undoubtedly, this will cause the agitation of scores of people in these countries.

In the end those religious leaders will be arrested or they will say that what has been written in their names are lies.

These pious people will defend those pamphlets rigorously and suspicious acts will take place leading to an edict either to seize their authority or replace them.

These acts will result in mistrust between the rulers and the pious in the country; therefore they will not be able to spread religion and build mosques and other religious buildings.

The leaders will consider religious sermons rhetoric and celebrations of creed as acts opposed to their regimes.

Furthermore, it will increase the grudges and alienations between religious scholars and rulers. Even Sunnis and Wahhabis will lose the protection of their interior centers, and they will not have external protection at all.

In the third stage, when our agents have established good relations with the business leaders, the military and executive powers and are doing their jobs quietly and with good manners and not interfering in religious actions, the result will be that their rulers will be reassured by these people more than previously. When disagreement arises between religious leaders and rulers, our famous scholars from this country will at that moment disclose their loyalty and defend the members of their countries, especially during the sermons of the creed and presents Shiism as a creed that does not pose a threat to religion.

If they can declare that to the people through the media they should not hesitate to attract the attention of the rulers and get their approval so that they will give them good jobs without fear at this stage.

Because of this transformation that will take place in our ports and islands and in other cities in the country, and with the funds we will invest, we will implement plans to strike a blow to the economy of neighboring countries.

Undoubtedly the business leaders, for the sake of gaining safe profits and economic stability, will send all their funds to our country, and when we make others free in their businesses and the banking funds are in our country, the result will be that their countries will welcome our citizens and give them economic facilities by which to invest.

When we reach the fourth stage, everything will be ready. We have before us countries whose scholars and rulers have disagreements, and whose merchants are about to become bankrupt and are leaving their countries.

The people are disturbed and ready to sell their properties at half price in order to be able to leave the country for safer places. In the middle of this chaos, our agents and immigrants will be considered the only protectors of rule and authority. All of our agents by being alert enough will take the most important jobs in the civil, military and government sectors, shrinking the gaps between them and government established rulers. From such a location we are able to easily point to the loyalists in government as traitors.

All of this will result in their downfall and eliminating them to be replaced with our agents. This job has two positive results:

1. Our agents will gain the trust of the rulers to an extent greater than previously; and
2. The discontent of the Sunnis towards the ruler will increase due to an increase in the Shia in government circles.

Because of this, Sunnis will carry out more acts of resistance, and during this phase our agents must stand by the rulers and call for calm and reconciliation. At the same time, the agents will buy the houses and properties of those about to flee.

At the fifth stage of the plan, the final ten years of the 50 years, the atmosphere will be ready for revolution, because we will have achieved the three elements of security, calm and comfort. The authority will look like a ship amid a typhoon, about to sink.

At that time it will accept any suggestions for survival. In this period we will suggest, through famous people, the formation of a popular assembly to calm the situation and aid the rulers in monitoring these circles, as well as keeping discipline in the country. Undoubtedly they will accept this suggestion and our candidates will win the majority of the seats. This will result in the flight of merchants and scholars, and even the loyal servants; thus we can export our Islamic Revolution to many countries without waging wars or shedding blood.

If the plan does not bear fruit and give us power in the last ten years, we could create a popular revolution and strip power from their rulers. Even if apparently our elements – Shiites – are citizens and inhabitants of this country, nevertheless at that time we will be able to say that we fulfilled our responsibility before God and our creed. It is not our target to put one person in control of power. Our target is merely to export the revolution, and by then we can raise the banner of this Godly religion.

We will go forward to the world of infidels with more strength and grace the world with the light of Islam and Shiism until the coming of Al Mahdi Al Mawoud.

Article first published in Bahrain Views.