Print
Email
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Muslim pilgrims perform Friday prayers around the Kaaba at the Grand Mosque in Mecca on November 4, 2011, as seen from Al-Masjid al-Haram (Hassan Ali/Courtesy Reuters).
For seven long days, the Saudi authorities lost control of Islam’s holiest site in Mecca. With the Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini contesting for leadership of the world’s Muslims, the Saudis were caught napping at the wheel during this week in 1979.
Led by the notorious Juhaymin al-Uteybi, hundreds of Salafist extremists from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Egypt, and even some from the United States seized control of the Grand Mosque after dawn prayers, holding thousands of worshippers from across the world hostage. They declared that Uteybi’s brother-in-law, Mohammed Abdullah al-Qahtani, was the long-awaited messiah, or Mahdi, to whom Muslims around the world were to pledge allegiance.
The Saudis were caught unaware, but that did not keep elements of the U.S. media from speculating that the gunmen were from Iran because of references to the Mahdi. Then, as now, U.S. media literacy regarding Islamic beliefs was worryingly low.
Unlike the U.S. media, when the Saudis reached out for help from the secretive French special forces’ unit, Groupe d’Intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale (GIGN)—reputed then to be the world’s best-trained special force—the commander asked if the Saudis knew who the insurgents were. The blank faces on the Saudi princes’ faces stunned the French.
Within days, the French infidels commanded Saudi forces to liberate Islam’s holiest shrine. The siege of Mecca started on November 20, and with the French at the helm, ended on November 27.
Twenty-two years later, the Saudi authorities still live in fear of losing control of their claim to legitimacy, the self-bestowed title “Servant of the Two Holy Mosques” (the second being in Medina, the burial site of the prophet Mohamed). Earlier this year, new security installments were put in place in Mecca. But no amount of security will prevent uprisings in Mecca or Saudi Arabia more broadly.
I have been a regular visitor to both Mecca and Medina for fifteen years now. On each visit, I find the intolerance of the religious police both barbaric and shocking. They still carry wooden sticks with which they beat women if they appear in areas designated for men, they break up gatherings of Shia Muslims, and they confiscate poetry in praise of the Prophet—deemed idolatry by Saudi Salafists. This visceral and violent inability to tolerate differences in Islam’s holiest shrines means that violent uprisings in Mecca and Medina are by no means a thing of the past. Unless reforms are introduced, and the religious police tamed, it is a question of time before unrest erupts again.
The masjidil haram police are now younger (students?). Very friendly and more tolerance. A very good development. Congrat saudi. Dont think masjidil haram police ever use stick on visitors. May be on one place. When some ppl scrambling on each other hitting and kicking each other to reach hajratul aswad the black stone. If you are muslim just visit kaabah and see for yourself how someof those visitors behave. Crowd control is close to impossible.
It is obvious from the article that the author’s idea of reform is to replace the current sunni leadership (so called salafists) with shia misguidance. This actually could stem from the author’s hussainic background that could well be shiaism.
I am a Sunni Muslim, Muhammad, but that is not the argument. Millions of Sunni Muslims share the last name Husain. Intolerance of Shia Muslims is a widespread problem in Saudi Arabia, and not just inside the haram. As Sunni Muslims, we should challenge this and hope for a Saudi Arabia of which we can be proud.
If “the French infidels commanded Saudi forces to liberate Islam’s holiest shrine”, then how can one explain that Mecca and Madina are still forbidden cities for non Muslims? On which theological ground does this interdiction stand?
What about the Jordanian special forces? Weren’t they in commond on the ground and they were the ones who, with the saudis, did the operation on the holy land?
I am a Saudi son of Saudi commander (Directorate of Military Works) whom toke over after a few days of the sage tasked to plan and exacting the liberation of the harm, since this was not a normal open battle field nor normal site the government asked the army engineers (Directorate of Military Works) to led the libration and they did. I can say that this report is fabricated and baseless. I can’t see why this subject is revisited now ?? and for what reason???. I can confirm that the French did offer to help but the Saudis declined. after a long sage the Saudi forces (Saudi special forces , army infantry , Saudi national guard) did break into the harm and stared another long process of librating the big unlighted basement under fire. the situation stared and ended in 15 days.
by the way “For seven long days, the Saudi authorities lost control of Islam’s holiest site in Mecca”. it is 15 days not 7.
Thank you for your comments. To Fawaz: this is being revisited now because it was during this week in 1979 that the siege began. For what reason am I revisiting it? To learn from history; the continuing intolerance on display in the haramayn is unacceptable and worthy of exposure because such intolerance helps justify extremism in the kingdom. For further details on this event, please see Yaroslav Trofimov’s “The Siege of Mecca,” Lawrence Wright’s “The Looming Tower,” and the autobiography of Lieutenant Paul Barril, the GIGN’s commanding officer for the mission. The name of his book is “Missions tres speciales”.
Thank you for your comment Ed.
1. you quoted “ this is being revisited now because it was during this week in 1979 that the siege began” according to hijri dates the siege started 1.1.1400 and ended 15.1.1400 I do have a souvenir from the battle ground with this date on it. Dose any of the book authors you referenced have any??? At least a picture of it ?
2. . you quoted “the continuing intolerance on display in the haramayn is unacceptable and worthy of exposure” please explain what intolerance do mean?? Are you referring to the intolerance to shia practices? since you mentioned “they break up gatherings of Shia Muslims”?
3.you should address the shia practices directly without involving the French and the Harm!. where is the connection here? If the extremists were successful then, no shia will be allowed to enter Mecca at all.
4.you quoted “see Yaroslav Trofimov’s “The Siege of Mecca,” Lawrence Wright’s “The Looming Tower,” and the autobiography of Lieutenant Paul Barril, the GIGN’s commanding officer for the mission. The name of his book is “Missions tres speciales”.” These are books written under an agenda same as your article. Have you seen in any of this book any evidence to support what they are claiming?
5.you as “Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations” I thing you need to do a lot of home work and do actually visit Saudi Arabia before you write any article, since I don’t think you did visit Mecca and medina for the last 15 years.
If I recall correctly, the French special forces involved in the operation to retake the Grand Mosque converted to Islam prior to the operation in deference the restriction barring non-Muslims from entering Mecca.
Obviously, this was done merely as a technicality to appease any possible protests at the use of non-Muslim forces in an effort to retake the mosque. However, the point should be remembered so alternate histories asserting that the French took no part in liberating Mecca are not taken as fact.
For those of you whose main issue with Mr. Husain’s widely accepted history of the siege of Mecca is the fact that an infidel might have set foot is Islam’s holiest city, know that steps were taken to respect the restrictions placed on the city by Islam law.
Was the French soldiers’ conversion a valid one since it was just done for convenience? And another question: does it mean that any non Muslim setting foot in Islam’s holiest city would defile it even if he or she is a God-fearing person, who has never killed or robbed anyone in his life?
I am from SA, and a Sunni Muslim, and I fully agree with Ed on this article. To Fawaz, I suggest you get your history facts from an independent source before you comment. Your comments just show us how state-controlled narrative is deeply propagated among the people here.