| |
COMMENTARY
No
use preaching to the converted
By
Phar Kim Beng
In the global "war on terror", it
has begun to dawn on the authorities that in addition to
the struggle against al-Qaeda and its like-minded
forces, one which has to be based on good intelligence
and sheer military might, winning the hearts and minds
of Muslims is equally critical.
Due to the
recent attacks in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the Islamic
world is finally beginning to feel the flame of
religious extremism edging ever closer from the
periphery to the center. As a result, the need to
isolate the extremists has never been more important or
more urgent.
Invariably, Islamic preachers in
the mosques have been asked by their governments to
denounce terrorism lock, stock and barrel. Indeed, to
abjure the kind of wanton violence perpetrated in the
name of Islam. Supposedly, this line-drawing exercise
will help demarcate good and moderate Muslims from the
hyper-zealous ones, and hence deprive the zealots from
preying on Muslims for new recruits. The extremists'
attempt to topple the government will be checked as
well.
Such a strategy, it is reasoned, would put
the extremists on the defensive. With their causes
denounced, they would not be able to draw on any Muslim
support, and their form of violence - which is driven by
intense hatred and fury for the West, as well as anyone
in league with it - would also be blunted.
But
asking preachers to denounce Islamic extremism will not
be successful, in either the short or the long term. In
fact, it may only amount to a strategy of false
reassurance that at least something is being done. One
reason this approach will fail is because in modern
times, the link between Muslims and their preachers has
not been as strong as in the past. As a mosque may often
accommodate literally thousands of worshippers, not all
worshippers know the preacher who makes the traditional
sermon on Friday; not even the worshippers in the front
row of prayer. Lacking any intimate link to a their
preachers, the personal appeal is therefore lost.
Nor are these worshippers even obliged to know
the iman, or the leader of prayer, as the
identity of the preacher is not crucial to the
performance of the obligatory Friday prayer. On other
occasions, there are also no public sermons, known as
khutbah, in mosques. So, the critical impact a
preacher's speech could have is blunted. In fact, many
worshipers' anger and their tenacity to challenge the
authorities are gained outside a mosque, rather than in
it.
Research done by Patrick Gaffney, an
anthropologist at the University of Notre Dame, has
shown that while fiery preachers in Egypt, for instance,
do inflame the feelings of Muslims, there is no
indication that they possess the moral authority to
douse their seething anger with the West or repressive
regimes. Thus, while preachers can go on record to
denounce terrorism and declare it an aberration of
Islam, their actions have no strategic deterrent value.
Nor can they decisively alter the behavior of those
Muslims who are already sympathetic to the causes of
radical Islamic groups; or those on the verge of
contemplating suicide attacks.
In studies done
by the Jaffe Center for Strategic Studies in Israel, for
example, it has been revealed that over the past year,
indoctrination has become less common. In other words,
even without any overt ideological incentives, the will
to participate in suicide attacks has increased. It is
found that the ongoing confrontation with Israel - with
its attendant toll of casualties, severe economic
decline, closures, curfews and roadblocks - has
intensified despair and frustration, much of which is
directed at Israel.
But this is the
aggression-frustration trajectory that psychologists
talk about when they touch on political violence.
Nevertheless, it is by no means the only dimension that
propels Islamic extremism. Political violence prevails
in the Islamic world because, by and large, Muslims have
been worse off than everyone else. This situation has
effectively allowed Muslim extremists to use this as an
"excuse" to argue that the present generation of Muslims
are way behind the glories achieved by Islamic
civilization in the past.
In order to counter
the extremists, the general living conditions of Muslims
have to be further improved. According to Johan Jaffar,
writing in The New Straits Times of Malaysia, one
particular study conducted on Jews in 113 countries
showed that their per capita income was US$15,000.
Christians surveyed in 218 countries indicated their
income per capita at $7,500, while Buddhists in 27
countries had an income per capita of $6,000. However,
Muslims surveyed in 123 countries registered only an
income per capita of $1,800. Furthermore, the literacy
rate among Muslims (51 percent) is lower than Hindus (53
percent), Buddhists (85 percent), Christians (87
percent) and Jews (97 percent).
Once again, the
"war on terror" shows that checking Islamic extremism is
not an easy task. What the authorities must do, and do
quickly, is to understand that the Muslim world cannot
be asked to divorce itself from terrorism with mere
rhetorical censure. Serious reform within these
societies is also needed. Since Islamic extremism also
draws on conflicts from abroad, which help to inflame
its passions, efforts to address major conflicts
involving Muslim interests must be dealt with too,
without which the conflagration will remain. This
includes tackling the perennial squabble between Israel
and Palestine, the dispute over Kashmir between India
and Pakistan, and that between Chechnya and Russia.
Beyond these three sets of issues, the West also needs
to ask the Wahhabi regimes in the Saudi peninsula to
open up further; indeed to democratize. Otherwise,
segments of the Islamic world will always be lurching to
violence and extremism, and violence will not
necessarily be effective.
Already, Israel has
classified suicide terrorism as a form of
non-existential threat. While it may create shock value
and destruction, it cannot create any mortal blow to the
existence of Israel. This is the conclusion drawn by
Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others as well.
But
asking preachers to denounce terrorism is simply one of
those half-measures that does not recognize the severity
of the problem of Islamic extremism. If allowed to
fester, the repercussions will grow progressively more
severe, and the economic, political and psychological
cost of terrorism to the rest of the world will only
increase.
(Copyright 2003 Asia Times Online Ltd.
All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
