Thursday , January 27 2022
Home / Articles / Time For Blunt Discussion On Region And Religion

Time For Blunt Discussion On Region And Religion

[Note added on Jan. 12, 2015: we discovered today that the article that we translated below (red text) is almost fully plagiarized. We apologize]

On November 10, 2014, Saleh Johar wrote an article entitled “Crusaders” Branding Others “Islamists”. Subsequently, the English article was translated into Arabic and posted on several Eritrean websites. On Dec, 13, 2014, EriAdal TV from Sweden published a Youtube video of an interview it conducted with Saleh Johar, mainly centered around the topic of the above mentioned article. On December 31, 2014, the article that we are presenting to you below appeared, in Arabic, on farajat as a reaction to both the initial article and the EriAdal interview. The writer is objecting to Saleh’s rejection of national debate where, he believes, quoting religious narrations hinders dialogue. believes that Eritreans need to have dialogues between, and among, Eritrea’s social segments and population groups, and particularly within the Eritrean Muslim population because there is a challenge in discussing national, social and political issues without some using the Holy books and historical narrations as conversation-enders. We would like to embolden all Eritreans to discuss issues without fear. We encourage Muslims and Christians who have so far been intimidated by the puritans among us into silence, to speak up.

We have translated the Arabic article that appeared on farajat, and we are sharing the exchange with you because we see the wall of separation that exists between Tigrinya / English vs Arabic readers in the Eritrean political sphere, with negligible overlap in the conversations. We believe that those who attempt to break down the barrier by translating works from English to Arabic and Tigrinya are doing a great service to the inter-Eritrean debate, and we invite the rest to help in such tasks or simply join in the conversation.

Oh Judge*, Why Have You Ruled The Invalidity Of Islam In Our Life?
By: Mohammed Idris Genadela- Switzerland

Ustaz Saleh, we have appreciation and respect for you as a renowned Eritrean journalist and writer, and we applaud your past and present political and media role in the service of the Eritrean case; this is an area of specialty where you can excel and be creative. But shame on you to speak about a religion that you are ignorant of!

Dear brother, Ustaz Saleh, if you do not know [about something] do not speak [about it]; beware of speaking except about what you know. Beware of playing with speeches outside the boundaries in order to attract a crowd. Because, playing outside the boundaries will result in your expulsion from the game.

In your article and interview with Eri Adal Television you said, “we do not need a professor to correct our examination papers”, but you exceeded professorship and installed yourself as a judge over the entire Eritrean Muslim people who don’t agree with you [since] you want to impose a way of life for the people. Which one is greater, imposing a curricula and courses [for a way of life] or correcting examination papers?

What is wrong with you, people, how do you judge? Shame on you for wanting to forbid a behavior only to come with what is worse .

How do you assume the invalidity of religion in politics and state when religion is a way of life of human beings, which does not have a separate role independent of worship. And politics, in its simplest sense, is the caring for the affairs of the nation; in practice, the state exercises such care, internally and externally, through its official apparatus, and the people supervise the state through their properly elected legislative parliaments. Politics requires from the ruler to correctly manage the affairs of the country and the people; the ruler must have enough wisdom and common sense in what he intends to do or not do. This in turn requires skill, experience, and knowledge of what is required by the leaders and presidents, and the ability to exploit available capacity in an optimized manner to achieve political, security, and economic stability, and good management of state resources without excesses or negligence. Therefore, it is a must for a mature nation to take care of its policies. But to say that that Islam as a doctrine and law should be kept away from politics, at arm’s length, is a view imposed by Lucifer and it is a hallucination of secular extremists who hate Islam to the extent of prohibiting it.

Religion and politics in Islam are two inseparable things, never, and you have to contemplate on the approach of our kind prophet, may peace be upon him, during the time of the State of AlMedina AlMunewera.

Firstly: the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, was a successful political leader. After he freed the minds [of the people] from the restrictions of pagan worship, he established the Islamic State in the hearts of the people, and he established a leadership that led the Muslim community to build the world and to protect the religion.

In Mecca, he established the state of Islam in the hearts of his companions and followers, but in Al Medina, he founded his real state on the ground. When he, peace be upon him, arrived at Al Medina, he developed a document of a great legal and political importance, which today is called a constitution, and he defined the components of establishing a nation, he defined the nature of relationship between Muslims and other citizens, especially the Jews. And he organized the elements of power and sovereignty in the emerging state– all of this [was accomplished] early in history when [elsewhere] the elements of the state had not yet appeared. In that modern civil state, he transformed rival tribes, warring over water and grass and hay, into one nation and a strong state that has a constitution that defined its parameters.

Isn’t all of the above an authentic political action?

Has religion become an obstacle as you claim, and you are annoyed because of the mere mention of the narration of Bukhari and Muslim?

Secondly: the Prophet, peace be upon him, faced two major political problems; namely, the problem of multiplicity of Arab tribes, and their conflicts in many places, and the hostility of the Jews against him. He therefore carried out an important political undertaking, which is the bond [he created] between the immigrants who followed him in the migration from Mecca to Medina. This was a political approach that started the establishment of a strong and unified state, since it does not make sense to establish a state on the shoulders of a feuding and warring groups to prevent the tone of “We are one people, and you a different people” does not prevail. Today, this great political awareness that the master of messengers had is not found among specialists who spent half their age in the study of political science, though some would demand to kill half of the people so that the other half can live in peace and live in prosperity, that would not dwindle and would not be disrupted by any disruptor. What kind knowledge and awareness is that?

As for the Jews, he specified for them, in the Constitution, their rights and obligation.

Was the teaching of the religion, which you mock and flout, confined to the faculty of Shariaa?

Then, what is this audacity to God when you talk about developing a way of life for all the people, Muslims and non-Muslims, what have you left for God to do?

Third: The Prophet, peace be upon him, is the first who taught both humanity and politicians “the science of diplomatic dialogue.” And that is [represented by] his sending, may peace be upon him, letters to the kings and heads of neighboring countries: nearly two hundred messages, to the kings, chiefs and notables of the time. He selected ambassadors and diplomats carefully. Moreover, he assigned some of his companions, may Allah be pleased with them, only for that political task. Among them [was] Dahya AlKelbi whom he sent to Caesar, the emperor of the Romans; and Abdullah Bin-Hdzafa, whom he sent to Kisra, the King of Persia; and Omar Bin Ummeyah, to the Negashi, King of Abyssinia; and he sent Hatib Ibn Abi Balta’ah to Cyrus, King of Alexandria; as well as  Amr Ibn al-Aas AlSahmi, whom he sent to the King of Oman; and he sent Al-Alaa Bin Hadrami to the King of Bahrain; this demonstrates [his] outstanding political leadership that established social, economic, and administrative system that still represents the most robust system compared to the systems of the world.

Isn’t all of that purely a political act? Did religion hamper politics at that time? Or did religion cleanse politics from the wrath of the deadly clannishness and tribalism?

The enemies of Islam portray politics as if it contradicts the holy message of Islam, and this is a lie and defamation because the call of Islam was to make people worship the Lord of all and to liberate them from submission to any ruler who rules the people with the power of the sword, and not with the sword of the law and the constitution, that the nation enacted and agreed upon–the knowledge of political matters, and how nations and peoples are ruled, and how to dialogue with others, and how to manage international politics, and the relations between states and peoples with each other, is something that has to be known by the guardian of such a nation, assisted by an elected advisory and legislative councils.

Isn’t all of the above-mentioned a foundation from the foundations of politics in Islam?

What Ustaz Saleh Gadi is seeking through his meetings and writings is to disqualify Islam as a doctrine and law, and a way of life, banish it from daily life itself, as well as from politics, and for Islam to remain trapped in mosques and in the hearts of believers? This is an explicit call to “Christianize Islam”, or convert it to Christianity by completely removing if from the affairs of daily life. That way, he wants to separate Islam from politics so that politics remains in the hands of gamblers and adventurers who do not wake up from their intoxication until the time of darkness inside graves where there [awaits] exhibits and accountability.

Why this grudge and hate of Islam?

  1. Because religion prevents them from tyranny and unjustly controlling the fate of people.
  2. Because it stands between them and between their unlawful consuming people’s wealth.
  3. Because it prevents them from trading with the honor of the people, to spread immorality and vice.
  4. Because it prevents them from being different and privileged from the rest of people, and [Islam] treats them equally like all people.
  5. Because it makes them accountable to justice if they transgress, regardless of their positions of leadership, social or scientific, or struggle, because there is no immunity for any creature from crime in front of Islam; these rejectionists of the issue of religion in the state, perform the five daily prayers, give alms, and perform pilgrimage, and fast, and put on a garb of piety, but unfortunately that does not prevent them from distorting Islam and disabling its role in life.

What remains in this life after the exclusion of religion, doctrine, and Shari’a, and way of life? Is the role of [religious] scientists and scholars limited to speaking about the provisions of menstruation and postpartum, and what spoils ablution, and the etiquette of entering the toilet, and explain the amount of alms [that should be given] during Eid Al-Fitr, and the edicts regarding the [use] of fragrances, and torment of the grave?

Has the Islamic religion become a heavy burden on society which must encircle it and get rid of it? Must politics be left to murderers and criminals and the drunken? Is Islam just a religion and it has nothing to do with the affairs of daily life?

If politics is the handling of the affairs of a nation, and to ensure that their interests are protected, and to provide housing, food and drink; treatment and education of the citizen; if politics is war and peace, and the conclusion of treaties; if politics is industry, agriculture and trade; if politics is education and formation of political parties and charities; if politics is caring for the poor and building of hospitals, schools and universities, if politics is all of that and Islam has nothing to do with that, please inform us about your knowledge, of what is the kind of Islam that you want, oh dear “Judge” Saleh Johar?

* In Arabic, “Gadi” means a judge and the writer has used wordplay to derisively address Saleh Gadi Johar as “Oh Judge”.

About awatestaff

Check Also

Hafeez Saaddin Mohamed Badlay: a tribute

Grief struck the Eritrean community in Melbourne following the sudden death of Hafeez Saaddin Mohamed …

  • Nitricc

    Just today, I was reading news and views about this confusing world and i was reading what was said by the toothless president of France. he said ISLAM IS computable with democracy while addressing the Arab league or gathering whatever, it was and since we have a blunt discussion in here, i was thinking, is Islam really compatible with democracy? like the the French president alluded? if you ask me, i will tell you straight up that any religion is not compatible with democracy and moreover, the religion of Islam is no where even near of that. when you can not even accept a sense of hummer, like a cartoon and simple style of expression, how in the hall are going to be tolerant enough to cool? now my inquiry is, is Islam compatible with democracy as the French president declared it? I say no!
    what say you? maybe the Islamist woman, Hayat Adam, will tell us.

    • Guest

      ISLAM is more than computable with democracy just some bigots inside it are not computable.

  • haileTG

    Hey Guest,

    The “one Country Two systems” like the Chinese/Hong Kong model has never been tried along sectarian/secular divide. Even if you were to consider it a possibility, you need to factor in territorial issues. Kebesa extends to Massawa and Adulis historically. The Bet Asgede going all the way to Anseba, deqi Mefles’ settlement leaves your lowland jurisdiction further up to the arid lowlands (without the Gash that is traditionally Kunama). The Muslim Denkel will be orphaned off. The next concern is external policy, defence matters, economic policies and other sensitive matters. What sort of structure would have an oversight? What is the cost and many more issues. So, can you give us a workable scenario for this interesting proposal that has never been seen in history before 🙂 ?


    • Nitricc

      Haile, Guest is again beating around the bushes. What he is trying to say is that the lowlanders and Muslims to Sudan and the Highlanders Christians to Ethiopia! He is to coward to say it openly and taking you for a wild ride; that all he is talking about. He knows very well two systems in Eritrea are unthinkable.

      • haileTG

        Nitricc, while waiting for Guest to analyze this thing for us, let me ask you this: given you have the plans to set up the biggest military, did you watch the ERiTV Navy show today?

        Why don’t they have any gear man? Even the toothless africans like Kenya have a battle ship. Do you know all the Eri nevy have is missail boats that are considered lighter weapon system than even pirates operate for motherships 🙂 Be honest now Nitricc, does PFDJ have a military to speak of? haha…

        • Shum

          Hello HaileTG,

          I think PFDJ is waiting for the Kenyan Navy Commander to defect with a battle ship. This falls in line with Nitricc’s military growth strategy where an expense budget is only needed for paint (red, green, yellow, blue). Heck they can even reuse the Ethiopian flag colors from defected materials since they seem to like their colors so much. What a forward-thinking leader, uhhmm, excuse me I meant to says leaders.

          • Amanuel Hidrat

            Dear Shum,
            Good one – to satiate the wishful urge of Nitrikay’s military growth strategy.

          • haileTG

            hi Shum, haha, I refuse to imagine Nitricc on his summer shorts trying to paint one of this baby:) It would be counted a serious sin, even by the standards of the ardent catholic my friend Hope… here is 4.6 billion Shillings sailing before us:-)


          • Nitricc

            lol, okay shum. it is not bad strategy; when you have a dedebitinins in charge; what out and yes
            i am looking to a good painters. since i can’t draw a stright line.

          • Shum

            No need to make excuses, Nitriccay. Painting is a toothless job. Besides, no one wants to see you in shorts with those Habesha igri derho 🙂 Secondly, if they were to station you on the coast, you’d easily get distracted by the chicks on the beach. You might spot Hayat and Rahwitey out there, too. Nah, give the task to Hope. I’m sure he’s got a lot of cousins who can help out.

          • Nitricc

            Shum you are a trouble maker hahahaha. well, i will never forgive you for setting me up for a date with known Dedbitians : – ) i am sure they are cute and all that but how dare you? lol
            anyway the only way i will be distracted is when the Ethiopian pailots keep bringing me MI-35ies, Mig-29iens, SU-27ens and thanks to haile if the Kenyans will add few battle ships then i am set for life and promise you i will keep painting necked lol. you kidding me!

          • Saleh Johar

            Nitricc, forget the toothless Shum, Hayat and HaileTG. When it reaches to that, I will rush to Home Depot and buy a dozen spray paint guns, just to make your life easy—who paint brushes at this day and age anyway. I will hire Semere to be your assistant, and Hope can supervise the job 🙂

          • Shum


            i think the Eritrean government kept Nitricc’s paint set at the Saudi Embassy. Someone should have told them it was flammable. Well, they probably wouldn’t take heed anyway. They’ve gotten a similar warning about our dear El Presidente. Zing!!!

          • Saleh Johar

            Shum, it is Nitricc’s mistake, this is the address he gave me and it is where I shipped it:

            Nitricc and Co.
            Hayat Street,
            Dedebit, Ethiopia

            He didn’t claim it, thus it was sent to Saudi Arabia for rerouting to Nitricc. See what he has done?

        • Nitricc

          Haile, biggest military? no, no, no, NO! sir! the smallest, the smartest and the most deadly, potent and robust one. there is a reason we fought over half a century, there a reason we paid very price there is to pay, there is a reason we should aim high and achieve it. we ought to the level of sacrifices we have endured. if not, why even go through what we have went through? so, the whole point is all about going high tech. as Eritrea and Eritreans concern, since we don’t have any plan to attack anyone; our objective is just be ready to the brim to defend our selves. we don’t need high tech tanks, we will have with friction of the cost high tech anti tanks. we don’t need hight take Migs, F-16 and SU’s, we will have high tech drones, and surface to air missiles. we won’t have hundreds of thousands who forced to wear the uniform, no, we will have only the few and the chosen once lucky enough to get to wear that uniform, in brief, your children are safe!
          regarding, Eri-Navy, well, for starters, you pee with what you have : – ) but in a show like this, you don’t show your hands, you go with minimum. so, if i were you, i won’t read too much to it. and at the end of the day, it is not the quality or quantity of the weapons but the quality of the people. besides; we have no danger coming through the sea, why do we need high tech battle ship? few Torpedoes should do the job, again let’s wait and you shall see.

    • Amanuel Hidrat


      There is no “unity of people” and “unity of territory” with two system in one circumscribed unit of land. If that is his “prelude stage” to the creation of two states, I don’t know. Let him spell out, if he is for unity of the people and unity of the territory, and how two system make us functional as one people of one territory. Guest has to make a sociological research study and come to his peers in the academia with his challenge. We will enjoy it. Otherwise this is an idea tagged as garbage in and garbage out.

      Amanuel Hidrat

  • haileTG

    Selam Guest,

    I understand your question to be “explaine or show that Secularism is relevant and applicable in Eritrea.”

    Here is may short and straight forward take:

    Without secularist national government, there is NO Eritrea to talk about. As simple as that. The minute you step out of that secularist construct, you need to cease all references to “Eritrea”. You could specify regions and localities that you think would be conducive for Sharia/Christian governance, but NO Eritrea. You will need to re-write history, conquer millions of Eritreans and force your wish. That is a tall order and extremely costly. But, make no mistake, I am talking WAR.

    Hence, neither a Christian or Muslim fundamentalist governmental structure would be able to maintain Eritrea. That is not just my view but the very reality of Eritrea on the ground. You can’t have Eritrea and non-secularist government at the same time. You must choose one or the other or eradicate part of the population by war or forced dislocation. Can you now explain and show us the conditions under which Christian Eritreans will settle for a Sharia government?


    • Nitricc

      “Hence, neither a Christian or Muslim fundamentalist governmental structure would be able to maintain Eritrea. That is not just my view but the very reality of Eritrea on the ground”
      Haile, thanks Sir.
      you said it. And it is my generation’s responsibility to implement the secular government that all Eritreans deserve to live in peace and dignity in their own land and country be it Christian, be it Muslim, be it highlander, be it lowlander, you are an Eritrean. As I have stated, the care taker of the nation will be the military any one who tries to be above the other then must be ready to deal with mighty of the Eritrean military; we intend to establish and create the most fair and just nation of Eritrea.

      • haileTG

        Nitricc…are we gonna have constitution or not under the mighty military:-)

        • Nitricc

          Haile the constitution will be guarded by the military so it won’t be shredded like to typical Africans. when Eritrean constitution is on, it is real and worthy of our blood. do you feel me, Haile?

        • Nitricc

          Haile the great the military has two objectives, protect the constitution and defend the nation. i will tell more about this but that what i am thinking. i really appreciate if you can throw me a bone on this on. give me your take.

          • haileTG


            How about just overthrow the regime, lead orderly transition, guard law and order as well as other state matters (such as territorial issues, securing essential trade corridors and other security diligence). Let the people write their constitution (let them fight it out within set time if they wish), let the people form their parties and election rules and with all set and good, the military goes back to the barracks (Sahel or some place like that). How is that for a meaty bone 🙂