A Second Look
at the Approaches to Militant Islam…
Part of my present work is peace advocacy. This, inevitably, leads to the approaches to
a perceived threat that is called Militant Islam, at times labeled as violent
extremism. The term covers a lot of ground,
as news reports tend to lump together Islamic movements regardless of ideology
and persuasion. My approach deals with
open and frank discussion with scholars, peace practitioners, and policy makers
that deal directly or indirectly with the much “feared” militant Islamic
movement aka violent extrtemism.
To begin with, Militant Islamic movements
are NOT monolithic organizations forming a sort of international front
(al-Qaeda, Jama’a Islamiyya, ISIS or otherwise). I recognize the legitimacy of the greater
majority of Islamic movements that attempt to articulate in various ways a more
authentic Islamic identity both in private and in public sphere. There is always the need to remind people,
especially policy makers in the West, that the militant Islamic movements or violent
extremism form a small (albeit very assertive) minority in the Muslim
world.
There are now more than a billion Muslims
in the world. Of this number, more than
two third lives outside the Arab world.
The biggest Muslim population is to be found in Indonesia. Muslims differ not only linguistically,
ethnically, racially and culturally, but also by the major divisions in Islam
between the Sunni and the Shiites and by various schools of laws therein.
Following the
tragedy of 9/11, there is always the danger of falling victims to over
simplistic responses or reactions to militant Islam or violent extremism in
Islam. The US and its allies (the so-called the “coalition of the willing”)
have launched the now famous slogan, “War against Terror”. The slogan without depth becomes a new
reductionism that leads not only to a naive response to a very complex reality
but also to certain myopia in facing the challenges of militant Islam. In fact, the myopia and naiveté fuel the
prevailing paranoia in viewing militant Islam. Time and again, we need to
emphasize that Islam and even the majority of the so-called militant Islamic
movements do not constitute the new “ism” confronting the West or threatening
world peace.
There is the
danger that the Cold War of the recent past is NOW being replaced with a new
war between Islam and the West (following the thought on the clash of
civilization). The Crusade is long
over…! The “war against terror” and the “coalition of the willing” approach
often are interpreted in the Muslim world as new Crusades against Islam. Thus, it is crucial to differentiate in
words and deeds (policy and commitments) the mainstream Muslims and
“legitimate” Islamic movements on the one hand and Muslim individuals and
groups that among others advocate for “terrorism” and violence, on the
other.
Majority of the
militant Islamic movements, including the more militant ones, are rooted on the
perceived or real injustices and poverty.
The disillusionment with the West and the US in particular, has material
basis. Many people claim and believe
that the singular US policy, which leads to Islamic radicalism and its anger,
is its continued all-out support to Israel in the whole Israel-Palestine question
notwithstanding the many UN Resolutions to the contrary. On this one particular issue, the US is,
tragically, always pitted against the entire Muslim world. (By the way, the
Organization of the Islamic Countries emerged following the occupation of the
West Bank, East Jerusalem, Sinai and Gaza post 1967 Arab-Israeli War.)
Burning issues
that fuel this growing frustration and sense of hopelessness are the following:
·
the continuing occupation of
the West Bank;
·
the absence of forward movement
in the Arab-Israeli Peace Process;
·
the ambiguity of other “Muslim
homelands” in many parts of the world;
·
the inclination to “lump”
Islamic movements into “terrorists circles”; and
·
the widespread poverty and lack
of development in the world of Islam despite the almost limitless petro-dollars
controlled by the few families in the oil producing countries in the Middle
East and North Africa.
These and the
continuing decline of Islamic world power following the collapse of the Ottoman
Empire make the more militant radical groups more popular in the Muslim
communities. Militant Islam, like the
ISIS, attracts adherents and this may pose serious implications for the
moderates – individuals and nations. The
failure to address these burning issues “satisfactorily” provides the fertile
ground for a “dangerous” militant brand of Islam.
The overall
positive reality in the world of Islam notwithstanding the existence of the
radicals is the fact that the great majority of Muslims and Islamic countries
are moderates. No doubt, they can serve
as positive forces and potential “bridges” not only between the Muslim masses
and the moderates but also between Islam and the West. In the final analysis, it is truly a “battle”
for the minds and the hearts of the masses.
And this war is never won in the battlefield, even when couched with
glorious slogans like “Operation Iraq Liberation/Freedom” or “War against
Terror”. In fact, battlefields simply
produce more martyrs and thereby further reducing the option to one, that is,
more violence.
Another approach
is the “policy of containment”. Containment has different meanings depending
on perspectives. The common
understanding is the military version that builds more fences, more road
checkpoints, more blockades, and more blowing of bridges that separate peoples
and communities. This type of
containment exacerbates the tensions and the anger that push people to
extremism. The other understanding of
“containment” is not “geographical” but “paradigmatic”. It is said that the best way to contain the
spread of militant Islam that is akin to virus is not to build more fences and walls
but to come up with a “vaccine” that presents a better image and hermeneutic of
Islam and traditions.
The biggest
obstacle in grappling with the militant Islam is the prevailing widespread of
Wahabbism not only in its traditional geographical sphere (Saudi Arabia) but
the preponderance of Wahabbism spread through petro-dollars among the scholars
trained in Saudi Arabia and in many madaris and foundations funded and
supported by Saudi’s petro-dollars.
Wahabbism is the
root to a taqlid-like approach to Islam that abhors any innovations (bid’a) and
consciously promote a sort of return to the early Islam or the Medinan
period (the Salafiyya movement is
precisely a return to the “early fathers of Islam” referring to the Medinan
Period).. Any departure from the
practice of the early Islam is considered “haram” or forbidden. This is an ideological and paradigmatic
approach of Wahabbism is the singular reason for the decline of Islam that
reached its pinnacle of enlightenment during the Umayyad era that merged the
ideas, philosophy and innovations by way of adaptation to the wisdom and
knowledge of the great civilizations of the Greek, Latin (Rome), Indic and
Chinese including the old Persian Empire.
With Wahabbism, the approach is, simply, to repeat all that happened
during the Median Era or simply return to the past that condemns any changes
and innovations!
No doubt, there
is also the urgent need to address the underlying socio-economic and political
realities (real or perceived) that reduce the vast majority of Muslims to
poverty and powerlessness. Petro-dollars and all the beneficence of the
God-given oil/petrol must again be considered as the “patrimony” of the Ummah. There
is a need to engage rulers of these petrol-producing countries and sheikdoms
that it is a scandal in the Islamic Ummah to have the opulence of brought by
petroleum being enjoyed by few families and treat these opulence as family
owned that can be dispensed with according to the whims and caprices of their
sheiks, emir and king and princes.
There is a
growing rejection of interpreting faith as something limited to personal and
private sphere. The exclusiveness of the
billion petro-dollars and the prevailing politics of oil within the Ummah are
not acceptable. The more enlightened Muslims should take the lead in asserting a
more egalitarian and religious message of faith in the public sphere. Believers, governments, NGOs and community of
nations should challenge the use of the multi-billion petro-dollar and make the
blessing of petrol/oil more responsive to the needs of the Ummah everywhere
thereby establishng a more equitable economic growth and distribution of wealth
within the Ummah.
Is it not
precisely the “reclaiming” of the public sphere that forms the concrete basis
for the inter-religious dialogues among the peoples of the BOOK? Ultimately, the dialogue of life and dialogue
of action make us all, Believers of Living Faiths, partners not only in our
critique of the earth and our relationships but also in that great faith
“enterprise” of building a new earth and forging new relationships.
In conclusion… I
quote Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, SJ: “The age of nations is past. It
remains for us now, if we do not wish to perish, to set aside the ancient
prejudice of ethnicity, religions, nations, cultures, civilizations, and build
the earth.”
Fr. Eliseo ‘Jun’
Mercado, OMI
Professor –
Notre Dame University Graduate School & San Beda Graduate School of Laws
