Question:
We know that the popular movements in Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran began spontaneously, as mentioned in the Broad Lines on November 5, 2019. Are they still so? Are there European roles in these three countries where the US is considered the dominant influence? Will the situations in these three countries remain as they are, or is the US in the process of changing these agents or some of them through normal transitions or via the military, as it did in Egypt and Sudan? May Allah reward you with goodness.
Answer:
To clarify the answer to the above questions, we review the following points:
First: Causes and Motives of the Protests
Yes, the protests began spontaneously in the three countries, and their motives are briefly as follows:
Iraq Protests: Popular protests broke out in Iraq in early October 2019 in the form of demonstrations and sit-ins that escalated into closing bridges in Baghdad and other major roads. This was in protest against the deteriorating economic conditions of the country, the rampant administrative and financial corruption in government agencies, and the spread of unemployment. They began spontaneously after the situation became unbearable and people’s lives grew constrained. The regime failed to solve the electricity issue over its 16-year lifespan, failed to provide job opportunities for youth and graduates, and failed to meet the people's basic needs despite enormous oil wealth. Consequently, the protests exploded, resulting in the death of nearly 350 people, in addition to thousands of wounded and detainees. Offices of parties participating in the government loyal to Iran were burned. Later, the perimeter of the Iranian consulate in Karbala was set on fire on November 4, 2019, pelted with stones, and calls were made for its removal from the city. The Iranian consulate in Najaf was also burned on November 27, 2019. What most stunned the Iraqi government was that these protests covered Baghdad, Nasiriyah, Karbala, Najaf, and other southern cities—regions the regime considers its popular strongholds. Due to the intensity of their impact, Abdul-Mahdi could not cling to power and resigned on November 30, 2019, with Parliament approving the resignation on December 1, 2019.
Lebanon Protests: The economic situation in Lebanon touched the brink of total collapse. Lebanese public debt reached $85.32 billion in early 2019 (Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, March 15, 2019). This is a massive debt where the interest (riba) paid on it consumes about half of the state's revenues. The country's debt-to-GDP ratio reached 152%, and interest on debt devours nearly half of state revenues (BBC, October 28, 2019). These capitalist crimes have left a high unemployment rate in Lebanon, estimated at 37% for those under 35 years old (BBC, November 26, 2019). Faced with this economic ruin bequeathed by the political class to the people, the spark of the "WhatsApp tax" on October 17, 2019, ignited the streets. Offices of MPs were set on fire, particularly in southern Lebanon, and Beirut, Nabatieh, and Tyre were inflamed as massive demonstrations broke out. These soon turned into demands for the government's resignation and the change of the entire political elite. Using the security-mindedness of the state and its followers, supporters of the Iran party (Hezbollah) tried to intimidate protesters on October 24 and 25, 2019, by storming sit-in squares. Supporters of the Iran party and the Amal Movement repeated this in Beirut once again.
Iran Protests: The Iranian regime was in no better state than its "Axis" countries—Iraq, Lebanon, and previously Syria. It lacks a care-taking (ra’wiyyah) perspective in governing, which allowed the Revolutionary Guard to control large sectors of the Iranian economy and marginalize non-Persian peripheral regions, creating a belt of misery around the state. The economic situation was on the verge of explosion in both the center and the periphery. It was embarrassing for a regime that boasts about its nuclear program and missiles to face popular protests sparked by a petrol shortage. This shortage resulted from a lack of refineries—a non-complex industry for states that properly manage their people's affairs. Despite Iranian petrol consumption increasing by nearly 40% since 2017 and the failure to operate a refinery in Hormozgan province, much of the petrol is smuggled abroad by gangs—not difficult for the state to identify—due to price differences. This is another manifestation of the state's failure to manage one of its most vital resources: oil. Consequently, the state raised the petrol price by 300%, sparking protests on November 15, 2019, in Tehran and dozens of other Iranian cities. The protests intensified, with banks set on fire and attacks on Iranian seminaries (hawzas), security offices, and government buildings. The government cut off the internet to prevent protester communication and resorted to the highest levels of violence, suppressing the movement with iron and fire. While Iranian security forces continued their crackdown, the Iranian opposition confirmed on November 23 that the death toll exceeded 300 (with 99 identified by name), the wounded exceeded 4,000, and detainees surpassed 10,000. They also noted the Revolutionary Guard removed bodies from hospitals to unknown locations (Independent Arabia, November 24, 2019).
Second: Are the Protests Still Spontaneous Without European Intervention?
Europe has tried to exploit the protests, but it has not been effective or influential in penetrating US influence in the three countries. This is explained as follows:
Europe's attempts in Iraq: As mentioned, the protests in Iraq, especially in southern regions, were escalating and concentrated in Shia areas. It is not unlikely that Europe, specifically Britain, tried to exploit them. Although there is no reliable evidence of direct British intervention, Iran was wary of this. It became such an obsession that the Friday preacher in Tehran, Mohammad-Ali Movahedi Kermani, described the Iraqi protesters as "English Shia," adding: "Some deviant groups that we describe as English Shia have infiltrated the ranks of the Iraqi people..." (Iran International, November 1, 2019). This statement reflected the fear of Iranian officials that Britain might exploit the people's movements, in addition to Iran's attempt to threaten protesters by accusing them of being British agents. This is especially true since Britain's stance was almost explicit in supporting the protests. The British Embassy stated on its official Twitter page: "Peaceful demonstrations are a right of the Iraqi people," adding: "Violence against protesters is unacceptable... our thoughts are with the injured and families of those who lost their lives" (Sputnik News, November 5, 2019). This was the same stance expressed by British Minister of State Andrew Murrison (Al-Ain News, October 27, 2019).
Europe's attempts in Lebanon: It is well-known that Lebanon is a playground for followers of both the US and Europe. It is also known that US followers—whether direct like Aoun and Berri or indirect like Hezbollah via Iran—are the materially stronger party. The followers of Europe (Britain and France) are the weaker party, such as Geagea and Jumblatt. Hariri is the weakest, as he has one foot in Europe and the other in pro-US Saudi Arabia. These followers cannot determine the final decision, but they perform actions to disturb the other side. For example, the four Lebanese Forces ministers resigned on October 19, 2019, from the government that protesters were demanding to topple. Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced a 72-hour deadline on October 18 to address the crisis and then resigned on October 29 against the wishes of the President and the Iran party which dominates security in Lebanon. France then sent its envoy, Christophe Farnaud, who delivered a message to President Aoun from President Emmanuel Macron confirming France's interest and readiness to help. This visit was not welcomed by US followers; the National News Agency quoted Foreign Minister Bassil as telling the French envoy that "no external party should enter the line of the Lebanese crisis and exploit it." Britain also sent its envoy, Richard Moore, who met Aoun and stated: "The UK has long been a partner and important supporter of Lebanon, for example, investing $200 million last year to support Lebanon's security, stability, prosperity, and sovereignty." He added: "It is important to continue respecting the right to peaceful protest, and any suppression of the protest movement through violence or intimidation by any party is absolutely unacceptable" (Independent Arabia, November 25, 2019).
Europe's attempts in Iran: The Iranian regime, as usual, claimed to be confronting external conspiracies and threats. The commander of the Revolutionary Guard, Major General Hossein Salami, directed a direct threat of "annihilation" to the US, Israel, Britain, and Saudi Arabia if they crossed "red lines." He told pro-government demonstrators: "I say to America, Israel, the House of Saud, and Britain that you have tried us in the arenas and were unable to respond... do not cross our red lines, or we will annihilate you" (RT, November 25, 2019). The regime wants to portray the protests as backed by external powers rather than by people who have suffered. However, all indicators show the protests stem from the people's hearts and blood. The tone of foreign intervention is ingrained in the Iranian regime, to the point of accusing Iraqi Shia protesters of being English Shia. The protests in Iran are not the first and will not be the last. They are likely spontaneous, with no signs of international hands. The protests in Iran, like those in Syria, involve a people struggling against tyrannical rulers whose policies have never tasted success in managing the Ummah's affairs.
Third: Regarding the US Changing Its Agents in the Three Countries
The actual influence in these three countries is American influence. Europe (Britain and France) has not succeeded in sharing this influence with the US.
Until the Ummah rises in a correct uprising based on Islam, leading to correct change, the rulers of these three countries will remain subject to US policy, whether it changes them or keeps them.
Colonizing disbelieving states want an agent to serve their interests. If a popular movement and disturbance occur during his reign, they give him a calculated period. If he cannot restore order and thus becomes unable to serve his master, they change him. The tool used is the falsehood of so-called "democracy," by bringing in a new agent with a less blackened face than the ousted one—this if the crisis is not insurmountable. Otherwise, the tool is the "military," as was done in Egypt in 2011 or Sudan in 2019.
Fourth: Expected Change in the Three Countries
Regarding Iran: The US openly declares that it does not want regime change in Iran. No matter how much killing occurs in the protests, the US sees that this regime serves its interests. While the blood of Muslims in Iran was being shed by the regime, US officials stated they were maintaining the regime: "A senior White House official reported Sunday that his country does not want regime change in Iran..." (Al-Arabiya Net, November 17, 2019). Therefore, no change in the Iranian regime is expected due to the November 2019 protests, just as no change occurred due to last year's protests.
Regarding Lebanon: As mentioned, Lebanon contains followers of both the US and Europe. The former group is stronger, which facilitates the concession of the weaker party according to the method of compromise. Both sides differ over a "techno-political" government versus a "technocratic" government. In any case, it is expected that the US will shift the scales of governance in Lebanon so that the weight remains with US followers, including European followers to a certain extent, and involving the "street" to calm it down.
Regarding Iraq: The US governs Iraq almost directly from behind a curtain. Its embassy in Baghdad has 16,000 employees monitoring all Iraqi ministries, especially oil and security. it is the largest US embassy in the world, and it has many military bases in Iraq, the most famous being the Ayn al-Asad base in Anbar. In the last week of last month, the US intensified its delegations; US Vice President Pence made a surprise visit to Ayn al-Asad on November 23, 2019. Before a week had passed, the US sent the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, to Baghdad on November 27, 2019. This is evidence of diligent US follow-up, especially since Iraq is sensitive for the US; it occupied it claiming to lead it to progress, but instead led it to turmoil and fragmentation. Now it is in successive crises. It is not unlikely, if the situation does not calm down soon, that the US will effect change through the "military" and involve the "street" with them in governance, similar to what was done in Egypt or Sudan. It has been noted that the Counter-Terrorism Service in Iraq—a large military force formed and equipped by the Americans—has stayed away from the policy of suppressing protests. Protesters in Tahrir Square seem to view this force as a savior from corrupt politicians, raising large pictures of General Abdul-Wahab al-Saadi, one of its leaders, after Abdul-Mahdi dismissed him. It is as if this force is acceptable to the protesters to have a role in arranging a solution. On the other hand, the military meetings the US holds in Baghdad and its envoys, along with the activity of its massive embassy, are not devoid of arrangements the US prepares for when necessary.
Abdul-Mahdi's resignation and the appointment of a new prime minister do not affect this; it does not solve the problem but is temporary, keeping the wound open until it heals.
In any case, the mass movement in the three countries has points in its favor and points against it. As for what is in its favor, the movement is spontaneous and remains largely so. As for what is against it, it has not yet taken for itself a leadership sincere to Allah (swt) and truthful to His Messenger (saw) to illuminate the path to the rule of Islam, the true Rightly Guided Khilafah. If the movement continues without sincere leadership and thus moves without guidance, its efforts and sacrifices will go in vain. The movement would then be:
وَلَا تَكُونُوا كَالَّتِي نَقَضَتْ غَزْلَهَا مِن بَعْدِ قُوَّةٍ أَنكَاثًا
"And do not be like she who untwisted her spun thread after it was strong." (Surah An-Nahl [16]: 92)
And Allah is the Guide to the straight path.
7th of Rabi’ al-Akhir 1441 AH Corresponding to December 4, 2019 AD