<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Reconciliation of Sunni and Sh’ia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/reconciliation-of-sunni-and-sh%e2%80%99ia/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/reconciliation-of-sunni-and-sh%e2%80%99ia/</link>
	<description>a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:07:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJ Nasreddin</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/reconciliation-of-sunni-and-sh%e2%80%99ia/#comment-28445</link>
		<dc:creator>AJ Nasreddin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:48:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=3163#comment-28445</guid>
		<description>Susan, you said: “There had been no conflict between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq before the imperialist invasion.” And this is not true. In the past there have been bloody confrontations between Sunnis and Shias – and one can say these started almost immediately after the Prophet Muhammed died. 

What you say about tribal society is true. Most Arab countries run themselves along tribal lines, subtlety or overtly. While the colonial powers drew the boarders of the modern Middle East, the concept of nationhood is not strong. For over a millennium, the Muslim world was more or less one entity. Although often divided into principalities, Muslims traveled relatively freely and kept their ethnic and familial identity – even religious identity – while living in the broader Islamic milieu. This mindset is still present today – so it is no surprise that Saudi Arabia and Iran, though religiously at odds, are willing to come together and talk as Sunnis and Shias have several times in the past, especially in cases of outside aggression.

I would argue that the Americans, and western nations in general, have always been keen on keeping divisions. Popularly for Arabs, the idea of Panarabism still has appeal – on the political level it can be seen through economic agreements such as the Greater Arab Free Trade Area. 

The Kurdish-Sunni-Shia split doesn’t make sense in the Middle East because they are not clear divisions for them – although they make it convenient to draw lines on the map by outsiders. Kurdish is not a religious sect but an ethnic one. So a logical split would be Kurdish-Arab. Kurds are by in large Sunnis. This would put Sunnis in the majority in Iraq. But of course no one defines themselves based on one criterion. Lines are drawn depending on the circumstances. The faulty logic used by western powers is to force a reality that doesn’t exist.

Dan Lieberman’s article raises some good points. However, he seems unaware of the long undercurrents of tension between Sunnis and Shias in the broader context. Reconciliation between the two cannot be expected. All that is really needed is a respectful tolerance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Susan, you said: “There had been no conflict between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq before the imperialist invasion.” And this is not true. In the past there have been bloody confrontations between Sunnis and Shias – and one can say these started almost immediately after the Prophet Muhammed died. </p>
<p>What you say about tribal society is true. Most Arab countries run themselves along tribal lines, subtlety or overtly. While the colonial powers drew the boarders of the modern Middle East, the concept of nationhood is not strong. For over a millennium, the Muslim world was more or less one entity. Although often divided into principalities, Muslims traveled relatively freely and kept their ethnic and familial identity – even religious identity – while living in the broader Islamic milieu. This mindset is still present today – so it is no surprise that Saudi Arabia and Iran, though religiously at odds, are willing to come together and talk as Sunnis and Shias have several times in the past, especially in cases of outside aggression.</p>
<p>I would argue that the Americans, and western nations in general, have always been keen on keeping divisions. Popularly for Arabs, the idea of Panarabism still has appeal – on the political level it can be seen through economic agreements such as the Greater Arab Free Trade Area. </p>
<p>The Kurdish-Sunni-Shia split doesn’t make sense in the Middle East because they are not clear divisions for them – although they make it convenient to draw lines on the map by outsiders. Kurdish is not a religious sect but an ethnic one. So a logical split would be Kurdish-Arab. Kurds are by in large Sunnis. This would put Sunnis in the majority in Iraq. But of course no one defines themselves based on one criterion. Lines are drawn depending on the circumstances. The faulty logic used by western powers is to force a reality that doesn’t exist.</p>
<p>Dan Lieberman’s article raises some good points. However, he seems unaware of the long undercurrents of tension between Sunnis and Shias in the broader context. Reconciliation between the two cannot be expected. All that is really needed is a respectful tolerance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/09/reconciliation-of-sunni-and-sh%e2%80%99ia/#comment-28329</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=3163#comment-28329</guid>
		<description>March 12th 2007
The tension between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq is completely an American doing, as other colonizing powers like the British imperialism have done in the past.

There had been no conflict between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq before the imperialist invasion.

The uprising of the Iraqi peoples, just after the first Persian Gulf War in1991, against Saddam’s Regime, was not a religious one. Both Arabs (Shia and Sunni) and Kurds (Shia and Sunni) were involved in those revolts.

Iraq is mostly a tribal society, which contain both factions. Furthermore, Shias and Sunnis have intermarried and the majority of the people are mixed. Just until recently many people did not know if they were Shia or Sunni, or even the difference between these two sects.

It is necessary to say that the same plots are planned for oil rich Iran, to divide this country between the different ethnics and religions in order to conquer it.

However, when a disturbance occurs in a body by a foreign object, the best cure is to remove it!
From:
http://democracyandsocialism.com/InBrief.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>March 12th 2007<br />
The tension between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq is completely an American doing, as other colonizing powers like the British imperialism have done in the past.</p>
<p>There had been no conflict between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq before the imperialist invasion.</p>
<p>The uprising of the Iraqi peoples, just after the first Persian Gulf War in1991, against Saddam’s Regime, was not a religious one. Both Arabs (Shia and Sunni) and Kurds (Shia and Sunni) were involved in those revolts.</p>
<p>Iraq is mostly a tribal society, which contain both factions. Furthermore, Shias and Sunnis have intermarried and the majority of the people are mixed. Just until recently many people did not know if they were Shia or Sunni, or even the difference between these two sects.</p>
<p>It is necessary to say that the same plots are planned for oil rich Iran, to divide this country between the different ethnics and religions in order to conquer it.</p>
<p>However, when a disturbance occurs in a body by a foreign object, the best cure is to remove it!<br />
From:<br />
<a href="http://democracyandsocialism.com/InBrief.html" rel="nofollow">http://democracyandsocialism.com/InBrief.html</a></p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

