The Shiite Islamic Sect in Nigeria

Shi'ism in the World & the Shiite Islamic Sect in Nigeria Shi'ism in the World History, Objectives & General Outlook Shiite Muslims make up the second biggest denomination of Islam, with the biggest numbers being represented by the Sunnis. The Shiite Muslims form about fifteen percent of Muslims. However, they are dominant in the nations of Iran, Azerbaijan, Iraq and Bahrain. In addition, Muslims have a plurality in Yemen and Lebanon too (Cave, 2006).

These two distinct groups within the Islam community first differed and deviated from each other following the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632. The divide arose from the fact that the followers were not able to come to an agreement as to whether it was right to select bloodline successors or able leaders most capable of following and propagating the tenets of the Muslim faith (Fuller and Francke, 2000). The Shiite community commenced during the 650s, after the son-in-law of Muhammad known as 'Ali became the Caliph.

Ali and his descendants are referred to as imams, who do not act as leaders of the Shiites but are deemed to be descendants of Muhammad. Following the demise of the eleventh imam in the year 874, as well as to the notion that his son is said to have vanished from the burial, Shiites came to perceive the child as a Messiah who had been concealed from the general public by God.

The biggest sect of Shiites, referred to as "twelvers," have been arranging for his coming back from that point on (Cave, 2006). However, several other Arabs offered support and backing for another contender, referred to as the Umayyad Mu'awiya, who eventually became the Caliph subsequent to the murder of 'Ali in the year 661 AD (Cave, 2006). Right from the ancient days of Islam, one vital and indispensable characteristic that has distinguished Shi'ism is the significance of the conception of ahl al-bayt.

From of the Shiite standpoint, it is necessary that the rightful leader of the Islamic community be a descendant of 'Ali, via the marital tie or link with Prophet Muhammad's daughter, Fatima (Duhnkrack, 2009). In addition, linked to this is the understanding of charisma that is an underlying belief in Shi'ism. In particular, Shi'ites consider themselves the rightful and legitimate interpretation of Islam as made known to the Muslim community by Muhammad's charismatic revolution (Duhnkrack, 2009).

More so, 'Ali, whom, in accordance to the concept of ahl al-bayt, Shi'ites identify as the original imam, holds this charismatic power and ability, resultant from the categorized connection of Allah down to Muhammad and further to 'Ali. According to Shi'ism, the belief is that 'Ali's charismatic power is authenticated by the specific individualities his followers bequeath upon him and by his selection as the Prophet's descendant and heir by Mohammad himself (Duhnkrack, 2009; Winters, 2007).

Nonetheless, 'Ali's charismatic power is not perceived and acknowledged to be divine, but rather as a consequence of his proximity to the Prophet. It is different not only hierarchically from the Prophet's charisma, but it has the absence of the radical personality of Muhammad's power and authority. In accordance to Shi'ites, its plain determination is to institute and maintain the social and cultural directive, which Muhammad publicized and sought for his religious community (Duhnkrack, 2009).

As a result, this standpoint can be beseeched against the frequently prepared classification by Western world, that Shi'ism (considering the role it played in the Islamic Revolution), is a radical, and inherently unruly religious movement (Duhnkrack, 2009). Subsequent 'Ali's assassination, the succession of imams signified charismatic individuals that went on to guide the Shi'a community continuously (Duhnkrack, 2009). This notion of the imams offers responses to the entitlement for a leader fitting to ahl al-bayt, and it is based on 'ilm' (Duhnkrack, 2009).

In disagreement to Sunnis, Shi'ites repudiate that the upright leader can be selected by and from common followers of the Muslim community. This claim is based on the perspective that the latter are human and fallible and therefore will commit mistakes and errors in the decisions that they make (Duhnrack, 2009). More so, the other standpoint is that they are deemed incapable of comprehending and making applications of the commands of the Qur'an (Duhnrack, 2009).

Implications to International Peace and Security The aforementioned prehistoric religious division is facilitating in fueling a renaissance of conflicts in the Middle East and Muslim nations. Skirmishes and battles between Sunni and Shia forces have nourished and cultivated a Syrian civil war that portends to alter the map of the Middle East, prompted violence that is rupturing Iraq, and broadened splits in a number of overwrought Gulf nations (Perry, 2010).

In addition, this has come to encompass a worry on international peace and security as mounting sectarian clashes have also instigated a revitalization of enmity within the Muslim community and reinforcement of global jihadi networks that carries a threat beyond the expanse (Council on Foreign Relations, 2015). According to Trofimov (2015), the increasingly ongoing conflict between Sunnis and Shiites, all across the Muslim world is quite easy to perceive as everlasting abhorrence and animosity will continue to keep claiming lives (at least in the foreseeable future).

The implication of this is that there will be an adverse influence, which will try to disrupt international peace and security. In the recent number of years, this divide between the Sunnis and Shiites has come to be the prevalent fault line in the fight for supremacy in the Middle East and beyond (Trofimov, 2015). From Yemen to Iraq and Syria to Bahrain, a great deal of the wars and political battles in the expanse pit the Sunnis against the Shiites continuously and fiercely (more so, in present times).

Nonetheless, the worrying aspect that might disturb international peace and security is that these battles are no longer regarding who was the rightful successor or descendant of Prophet Muhammad, which is the basis of the original faction. Instead, these two sects are constantly fighting for the political and economic influence within these nations and the greater Middle East (Trofimov, 2015). As aforementioned, the revolution of the Sunni-Shiite conflict dates back to the Iranian revolution of 1979 and its outcomes.

This encompasses when conformist regimes in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, confronted with Tehran's assertion to be the leaders of Muslims across the world, reacted by challenging the Islamic qualifications of Shiite ayatollahs (Trofimov, 2015). The opposition added a new incentive and stimulus with the invasion of Iraq by the United States in the year 2003. This, as a result, ended up empowering majority of the Shiite community at the expense of the minority of the Arab Sunni, who has led the nation from the time they attained independence.

In the end, the militant outfit, now referred to as 'Islamic State' was formed in the mayhem and turmoil that took place and elevated anti-Shiite fanaticism to new heights (Trofimov, 2015). Further, animosity reached genocidal levels subsequent to the civil war that broke out in Syria in the year 2011. The progressively increasing influence of Islamic State refused to acknowledge Shiites as Muslims and gave them the ultimatum of either converting into Sunnis or being killed (Trofimov, 2015).

These religious alignments have glazed the contemporary war in Yemen, as well, with Saudi Arabia pulling together a combination of Sunni countries against the pro-Iranian Houthi insurgents, who abide by to a strain of Shiite Islam. According to Trofimov (2015), up until the war, there has been a perspective that Iran was surrounding and imposing itself upon Saudi Arabia, that this Shiite revitalization is taking place at the expense of the Sunnis. It was no longer a Shiite curve but a Shiite circle (Trofimov, 2015).

During the course of the four and a half years of armed conflict, a great deal of Syrians have lost lives, an aspect that initially started with anti-government remonstrations prior to escalating into a full-blown out civil war. In accordance to Rodgers et al. (2015), statistical reports handed out by the United Nations indicated that 90,000 individuals had been killed in the year 2013. Nonetheless, in the following year 2014, this figure doubled to more than 190,000 and by August 2015 this number increased all the more to 250,000 people.

In addition, more than eleven million other Syrians have been forced out of their own homes and have now become refugees. This is due to the protracted battle in Syria between the forces that are loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and those who are fully in opposition of this regime. More so, in the contemporary, the conflict has come to be more than just a conflict between the groups that are for and those against the regime and rule of President Assad.

The war in Syria has attained new sectarian parties, which has set the nation's Sunni who are the majority against the President's Shia Alawite Muslim Sect. In turn, this has drawn the bordering nations as well as world powers into the conflict. The increase and progression of jihadist groups, which also includes the Islamic State, has added another party into the equation (Rodgers et al., 2015). This has shaken international world peace and security with terror acts taking place all over the world (Rodgers et al., 2015).

In mid-2013, hundreds of civilians were killed subsequent to the firing of rockets that were filled with sarin, which is a nerve agent. These rockets were launched and fired at numerous districts near Damascus. This act instigated plenty of rage in the Western world powers, who claimed that President Assad, a Shiite, and the Syrian government could only have undertaken such an evil act. However, President Assad's regime, together with Russia, one of its ally, refused and placed blame on the rebels (Rodgers et al., 2015).

However, with the possibility of the United States military forces intervening into Syria, President Assad signed an agreement for the total surveillance, removal, or demolition of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal. This undertaking was done by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) together with the United Nations. This demolition of chemical weapons came to completion a year later (Rodgers et al., 2015).

Disturbingly, irrespective of this agreement and the operation, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has reported the use of toxic chemical weapons, such as those containing ammonia and chlorine on a number of occasions. This time, however, the guilty party was President Assad's government that used such damaging weaponry in the course of attacks on rebel villages located on the northern region of Syria between the period of April and July 2014 (Rodgers et al., 2015). This severe attack resulted in the death of at least thirteen people.

In retaliation, the Islamic State also used homemade chemical weapons. These weapons are made of Sulphur mustard, which is a blistering agent and have been deployed against Kurdish forces as well as innocent civilians located in the northern region of Syria (Rodgers et al., 2015). What started out as another Arab Spring uprising against a despotic and tyrannical leader has expanded into a vicious proxy war and conflict that now involves regional as well as international powers.

The outcome is that there is a heightened threat to international peace as jihadists are also targeting different African and European nations. The largely regional and religious strife now poses a serious concern for global peace and safety. Iran and Russia have supported the Shiite-led government regime of President Assad and have steadfastly increased their backing (Rodgers et al., 2015). In addition, it is believed that Tehran is investing billions of dollars every year to shore up and strengthen President Assad's regime.

The support provided comes in the form of provision of military advisers as well as weapons, which are provided at subsidized prices. In addition, Tehran has opted to provide lines of Credit to Syria and also oil transfers to the president's government. In addition to the regional support, President Assad's forces and government receive international support, too. In September 2015, according to Rodgers et al. (2015), Russia deployed an air strike campaign on all adversaries of President Assad.

This world power (Russia), insisted that it was targeting only the terrorists, most of all members of Islamic State, but several of the strikes hit rebels (those supported by the Western nations), and also innocent civilians. In addition, the Syrian government and President Assad have enjoyed the backing of the Shia Hezbollah movement, hailing from Lebanon. This supportive movement (Shia Hezbollah) has given the Assad fighters renewed vigor (by way of direct, significant support in the battlefield from the year 2013) (Rodgers et al., 2015).

On the other hand, the opposition group, dominated by the Sunnis has, in the meantime, appealed for support on many differing magnitudes from its main supporters that include Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, United States, United Kingdom, and France. Nonetheless, the upsurge of hard-hitting Islamist rebels and the influx of jihadists from all over the globe have resulted in a noticeable perseverance of Western backing.

U.S.-led alliance aircraft provide substantial backing to Kurdish militia armed forces looking to protect three independent territories in the country's north from attacks by Islamic State. However, the program to train and provide armed support to 5,000 Syrian rebels to take the fight to Islamic State on the ground has not been very successful (Rodgers et al., 2015).

The faction in Islam, festering for about 14 centuries, does not provide piecewise evaluation and comprehensive explanation of all the political, economic, and geographical-strategic factors that are involved in these conflicts that have spawned internationally. However, it is prism encompassing different hues, through which is possible to understand the fundamental tensions and conflicts (Council on Foreign Relations, 2015). In general, two nations are in competition for the leadership of Islam. The race is steered by the different Islamic sects that are leading the individual nations.

Saudi Arabia, which is led by Sunni, is in conflict with Iran, which is led by Shia (Council on Foreign Relations, 2015). This split with regard to sects has instigated a great deal of national, regional, and international conflict as they make an attempt to further their ambitions and uphold their identities, and thereby supremacy.

According to Council on Foreign Relations (2015), the manner in which this rivalry is settled will probably shape and fashion the political poise between Sunnism and Shiism as well as the future of the region, particularly Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain, and Yemen. Shiite Islamic Sect in Nigeria History, Culture, Socio-Politics of the Shiite Islamic Sect in Nigeria Subsequent to the Islamic revolution that took place in 1979, the promotion of Khomeinism by Iran has been one of its foreign policy implements in the Muslim world (Akhavi, 1983).

Irrespective of the massive topographical and cultural detachment of Nigeria from Iran, there is no other expanse distanced from the Middle East, where this particular philosophy and dogma has a superior influence than in the northern region of Nigeria (Soares, 2009). The Shi'a Muslim community in Nigeria, which is pro-Iranian, fundamentally did not exist about three decades ago. However, in the present day, this community makes up approximately 5% of the considerable 80 million Muslims in the state of Nigeria (Zenn, 2013).

In the recent years, Quds Force from Iran and Hizb Allah from Lebanon have organized and synchronized the gathering of intelligence on United States and Israeli targets in Nigeria (Zenn, 2013). In addition, they have taken part in the trafficking of weapons and drugs into West Africa with operatives taken from the Shi'a community in Nigeria. In addition, the government of Iran sustains and fosters affiliations with a dominant religious group referred to as the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN).

The Iranian government also maintains ties with an influential religious group called the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN). The bomblasts and terror activities by the IMN's prominent imams and previous members provide considerable accent to the blistering combination of Islamic fundamentalist engagements that materialized in northern Nigeria subsequent to the 1970s (Zenn, 2013). Despite the fact that a majority of Nigeria's Muslim population is made up of Sunnis, there subsists a substantial and influential Shiite minority in the West African nation, with the followers being approximated to as much as 10 million.

In particular, the Shiite movement is strong and formidable in the Northeast region of Nigeria. It is imperative to point out that this is the same region where Boko Haram has instituted itself and carries on to undertake a violent uprising against the government of Nigeria (Center for Security Policy, 2014).

The growth of the Shiite movement in Nigeria is comparatively current, mounting substantially in the 1980's, under the guidance of Ibraheem Zakzaky, the initiator of the Muslim Brotherhood of Nigeria (Yan Brotherhood.) His motivation for a transformation in outlook toward a Shia philosophy stemmed from the victory of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 (Akhavi, 1983). Zakzaky and his brainchild, the Islamic Movement, were shortly on the workforce of Iran's religious organization.

In particular, Iran has, for a long time, tried to institute Shia bases all over Africa, chiefly in nations that are strategically significantly and rich in natural resources, such as Nigeria (Center for Security Policy, 2014). What is certain with regard to the philosophy and beliefs of the Shi'a community in Nigeria is that, similar to the Iranians, they have conviction that it is a right for Islam to rule, and that Sharia ought to be the prevailing law of the people and the land.

professing such a domineering view, they castoff and refuse to acknowledge the laws and constitution enacted in the nation as stemming from proscribed sources. More so, they proclaim that their operations and actions are for the formation of an Islamic State in Nigeria, one in which the prevailing constitution would be the Qur'an and the Hadiths set out by the Prophet Muhammad (Ostien, 2012). The Shiite Islamic Sect condemns democracy in any case as it subsists in principle and without doubt in practice in Nigeria.

The Shi'a community or sect does not sing the national anthem, they do not show any respect to the flag of the nation and also do not pledge any allegiance to their land and nation (Ostien, 2012). Imperatives of Shiite Activities on Nigerian National Security Shiite activities have largely had an adverse impact on the national security of Nigeria.

To start with, according to Zenn (2013), the Zaria, Islamic Muslim State's enigmatic leadership based in Kaduna and the attraction of northern Nigeria to revivalist Islam makes it possible for Iran to propagate Khomeinism in Nigeria (Zenn, 2013). By consequence, it has led to spread of antagonism towards the Western world.

Kaduna, which is set as the political center of the northern region of Nigeria, has seen a rise in violence between Muslims and Christians and anti-Western sentimentality from the time Nigeria reinstated democracy in the year 1999, and 12 northern states espoused improved forms of Shari 'a (Zenn, 2013). The Islamic Muslim Nation's takes advantage of this extremist-prone setting to espouse its message and belief to Shi'a and Sunnis, together with members who joined different movement such as Boko Haram (Zenn, 2013).

It is imperative to point out here, that not only has the Shiite movement increasingly caused worry for National Security through the torture and killings of Christians, but also through the current fighting between them and the Boko Haram. According to Center for Security Policy (2014), the progressively Shia alignment, and the participation of Iran, brought about a rift within the Yan Brotherhood, with Boko Haram originator Muhammad Yusuf, distancing himself and realigning forces with a series of Salafist organizations, before finally establishing Boko Haram.

Zakzaky's manifold social calls and engagement to the Iranian Islamic republic have fortified his movement's financial backing. However, at the same time, it increased tensions with Sunni sects (Okakwu, 2016). There has been great worry for national security owing to the clashes between these different sects. To begin with, there has been sectarian conflict and clashes between the Shia and Sunni supporters in Nigeria.

This is largely because the Sunnis resist and refuse the Shia diktats to use mosques for prayer as well as other socio-religious activities in cities located in the northern region of Nigeria, such as Sokoto, Katsina and Kano. In mid-2007, the Nigerian security forces ended up destroying the Islamic Movement headquarters that was located in the town of Sokoto. This was due to clashes that took place between Shia and Sunni groups, subsequent to the shooting of a prominent Sunni cleric (Human Rights Watch, 2015).

The leader of the Shi'a community in Nigeria, Zakzaky, openly made proclamations against the radical visualization of Islam propounded by Boko Haram. As a result, this has led to a substantial animosity and hate between these two Muslim groups. In response to these remarks, Boko Haram has targeted and killed several members of the Shia community along with several other Nigerian civilians.

In accordance to Human Rights Watch (2015), not less than 9,500 deaths of Nigerian civilians has taken place since the start of the different violent Boko Haram attacks in the year 2009 (Human Rights Watch, 2015). Similarly, in the year 2012, Muhammad Ali, who was a previous close acquaintance of Muhammad Yusuf (who had come to be a Shia leader), was gunned down and killed at his home in Kano. This killing was implemented by gunmen considered to be sect members of Boko Haram.

In addition, in the recent year 2015, the Boko Haram undertook a suicide bomb attack during the course of Shia procession in the town of Kano. This attack killed at least 22 people and the Boko Haram proclaimed that they were behind such attacks. following which, they went on to declare that their plans were to kill and wipe out the entire Shia community (Human Rights Watch, 2015).

Prognosis on future of in Nigeria One of the great foreseeable, disconcerting worries about the future of Nigeria is the continued hostility and conflict between the two movements. In accordance to Campbell (2015), despite the fact that these two movements are adversaries, there are disconcerting equivalents between the Zaria killings that took place in 2015 and the murder of Boko Haram members and the killing of its leading light, Muhammed Yussuf, which took place in 2009.

It is imperative to point out that the latter is what instigated and prompted the Boko Haram into its murderous radicalization. More so, in both of these instances, the numbers of followers killed might be of the same scale, at around eight hundred people. The major dissimilarity, however, is that in the previous one Yussuf was murdered but in the recent attack, Zakzaky was not killed.

Nonetheless, sources give an account that he had suffered bullet wounds and was extremely wounded and bleeding profusely, and may have just about escaped death. However, incidentally, the most noteworthy difference at that time is that Boko Haram had no overseas supporters then, but Zakzaky and the Nigerian Shia do have an overseas backer in the form of Iran (Campbell, 2015).

Therefore, the worrying future of Nigeria is that the recent massacre of Shiite community members will lead to a radical, violent sect or group similar (as a response) to that of Boko Haram, which will induce terror and further strife in the nation. More so, there are two significant worrying aspects. The first one is that the followers will call for the release of their leader Zakzaky, considering that he did not die during the attack.

The second worrying factor is that, if at all this leads to a murderous radical sect, they have an overseas supporter in the form of Iran. This might imply the supply of funds and also weaponries to this sect with the overbearing emphasis of turning Nigeria become a Muslim State (Campbell, 2015). The Islamic Movement is perceived by the Nigerian military to be a group or a movement that endeavors to institute an Islamic State by initiating and instigating a revolution similar to that of Iran.

More so, it is a minority group operating in a state filled by a majority of the Sunnis. Towards the end of 2015, the Nigerian military attacked the home of Shiite leader Zakzaky and killed almost 1,000 others (Naij, 2015). The IMN's connections to Iran have given rise to reactive postures and actions by the Islamic Republic, reproving the activities of the Nigerian military and summoning the country's ambassador.

IMN leaders, though, continue to insist that theirs is a non-violent group and that they did not undertake any act of violence against Buratai (Naij, 2015). It is also considered that over 1,000 members of the group were massacred in the course of the altercation and that the government is making attempts to cover up such a huge number. It is believed that the military hastily buried the bodies in mass graves to cover the number of people killed (Naij, 2015).

Javad Zarif, who is the Foreign Minister of Iran, has requested and insisted on instantaneous and severe action to preclude violence against the Islamist group (The Iran Project, 2015). In an undisputed declaration, over two hundred members of the Iranian parliament indicted Nigeria of setting fire to the house of a cherished member of the clergy while at the household with his family and then subjecting them to gunfire. Iranian information outfits have also started to attack the Nigerian regime of a theoretical prejudice against Shiite Muslims (Naij, 2015).

It is imperative to note that the nation's leader, President Muhammadu Buhari is a Muslim hailing from the Sunni community. Different news outlets from Iran stated that the government of Nigeria made the decision to attack the group of people (Shi'ite Muslims) owing to the growth in the population of Shiites in Nigeria (Naij, 2015). This has added to the growing story that the massacre attack on the Buratai region was due to religious reasons.

This perspective can easily start a civil war between the Shiites and the Sunnis, as they are the different sects (bearing animosity towards each other) in the nation. In the meantime, both sects, encompassing the Boko Haram are against the government administration as they seek a Muslim State. Therefore, this implies that there is a serious possibility of increased conflict between the three parties. On the other hand, the military leader, General Buratai, has personally stood by his army's reaction to the attack.

The leader went on to assert that the group members of the Shiite community were not only heavily armed, but at the same time also threatened him and his entourage while on his way to Zaria (Naij, 2015). More so, the military leader proclaimed that they were lucky to escape from the area and that they had evidence of a video clip, which showed the incidents (supporting his claims) that took place.

Nigerian military officials proclaimed that the Nigerian government has the obligation of protecting its citizens against Islamist parallel regimes within Nigeria. They have insisted that the government does not have anything against the Shiites as they are all Nigerian citizens and they are obliged to protect them as well. However, they have asserted that the Shiites want to be a state within a state and the military cannot allow them to form a parallel government within the country (Naij, 2015).

Another aspect that might project hostility in the future is the fact that Zaria, the region where the attack took place, is roughly 400 miles from Maiduguri, the main center of the Borno state as well as the center of operations for Boko Haram, which is a Sunni Group involved in terrorism It is believed that the nation's military reaction to a minor operation from the larger counter-insurgency operation propelled President Buhari's ascension towards the presidency (Martel, 2015).

In addition, President Buhari shifted the command center of the military to Maiduguri as well as afterwards made a vow to eradicate Boko Haram completely by the end of the year 2015. From that point in time, Boko Haram vouched its commitment to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi who is the head of the ISIS (Naij, 2015).

The implication of this is that if the military is on a crackdown of the different violent sects, then the future of the nation is bound to be filled with plenty of violence and conflict between the military of Nigeria, the Shiites, and the Boko Haram sects (Naij, 2015). Options for surviving Shiite distress in Nigeria As a result of the recent (between the 12th and 13th of December) massacre of about 1,000 Shia Muslims by the Nigerian army under command of Chief of Army Staff Lt.

General Buratai, it is imperative for Buratai to resign from his post. This is one of the options for avoiding any sort of violent retaliation from the Shiite followers. It addition, it is imperative for the House of Representatives to unearth the basis and origin of the clash towards finding an endearing solution to diffuse the volatile situation and institute peace in the nation.

More so, it is imperative for the House of Representatives to undertake a thorough investigation, taking into account the sensitive circumstance in which the nation is at, at the moment (Naij,.