Salman Rushdie, Fatwa, Ayatollah, Might Is Right

I delve into day-by-day news not a whole lot and as far as currrent events in Iran I watched a little of the channel on YouTube of the UK based Iranian/British Mahyar Tousi, who like seemingly very many Iranians was very pleased with the demise of the Ayatollah, and hoped the days of that pretty regime were ending, that the thousands of protesters recently massacred there would not be in vain and so on. 

My own knowledge of things there is basically negligible to the point of non-existence, but one thing that did come to mind that I just checked up on was the fatwa issued by the head of the Iranian government, Ruhollah Khomeini, against Salman Rushdie back in 1989, ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of his novel, The Satanic Verses. Details on the fatwa are taken from the relevant Wikipedia article. One possibly relevant detail is that the novel contains a derogatory treatment of the Ayatollah himself, and possibly the fatwa is more inspired as a reaction to this treatment than actually to Islam and Mohammed.

Numerous killings, bombings of bookstores and attempted killings followed the book’s publication and subsequent fatwa, including an attempt on Rushdie himself in New York at a book reading in 2022, which was celebrated by Iranian state controlled media. In 1993 in Turkey 37 people died at an attack aiming to kill Aziz Nesin, a Turkish translator of the book.

This is the basically official release from the head of Iran regarding the call to kill Rushdie:

I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qur'an, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. And whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, Allah willing. Meanwhile, if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions.

Rushdie subsequently apologised for any upset he caused, but this followed from the office of the Ayatollah:

The imperialist foreign media falsely alleged that the officials of the Islamic Republic have said the sentence of death on the author of The Satanic Verses will be retracted if he repents. Imam Khomeini has said: This is denied 100%. Even if Salman Rushdie repents and become the most pious man of all time, it is incumbent on every Muslim to employ everything he has got, his life and wealth, to send him to Hell.

        If a non-Muslim becomes aware of Rushdie's whereabouts and has the ability to execute him quicker than Muslims, it is incumbent on Muslims to pay a reward or a fee in return for this action.

Iran then offered a reward of $6 million for the killing of Rushdie.

The stance of the Iranian regime has changed at times regarding this call to have Rushdie murdered, but the position of the Ayotallah Khameini was, as stated in 2019, that this fatwa was “solid and irrevocable.”

So this is a regime operating in total disrespect of not just ‘offenders’, but also of foreign countries’ rule of law. In these terms the Islamic Republic of Iran is by definition lawless, sees no limitations on what actions may be ‘legitimately’ carried out anywhere in the world on the ‘enemies of Islam’, and the rule of law there is irrelevant. In a sense, it is a regime in its own eyes without borders in terms of the limits of what it may call for abroad, and of course one can surmise a very dark reality for any citizens within its borders not bowing sufficiently down. 

So anyway once you’re operating within parameters that are essentially lawless or without legal constraint, I think you’ve sacrificed any right to complain about being treated as a kind of toxic international pariah and legalistically illegitimate. You’ve yourself created and signed up to a reality where might and violence is right, so what kind of argument have you got against might being right?