The changing face of terrorism

"The principal beneficiary of the messy political equations has been the increasingly influential Islamist fringe," writes Brussels based International Crisis Group in its report on Bangladesh, "led by the legitimate governing parties like Jamat but extending to the violently militant JMJB and JMB. Circumstantial evidence as well as cold political logic suggests that underground terrorist groups have been cultivated and sheltered by those in power."

Islam does not preach violence. The terrorist groups among the Muslims calling themselves "purists" for their strict interpretation of the Holy Quran and the Hadith and recalling the history of the battles between Sallahdin the Great and the Christian Kings for the control of Jerusalem, holy to Muslims, Christians, and Jews, have imprinted in mainly the Western mind the typical picture of the Byzantine Empire, the torch-bearer of the Greek civilization, in the Ottoman Turks of a rival culture and a religion and of battles fought between the Christians and the Muslims from the early eleventh century to the end of thirteenth century for the control of the city of Jerusalem, sacred to the Christians as the site of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as millennial rivalry and as a contest between two rival religions and civilizations that continues till today.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

The common Western perception that Islam spurns modernity and finds solace in a life of 6th century Arabia has found intellectual backing in historian Bernard Lewis's observation that the world has a "clash of civilizations," Islamic vs. Christians and post-Christians; rigid theocratic hierarchy vs. permissive secular modernism charged with the Muslim world's "downward spiral of hate and spite, rage and self-pity; poverty and oppression."

The common Western suspicion of the Muslims grew stronger due to their belief that the Muslims were horrified by the fundamental debasement and moral corruption in Western society and of the West's tolerance of every sort of decadence and consequent Islamic contempt of a dissolute culture. The Muslim's "contempt" of Christianity was falsely based on the premises established by a kind of atheism/agnosticism among the modern day Westerners, resultant of the simultaneous assault by the followers of Marx and Freud -- one contending that evil springs from unjust social conditions created by unfair political systems while the other saw it as a product of psychological dysfunction.

Regrettably the term "Islamic fundamentalism" that has gained global currency though the term "fundamentalism" originated in Christianity and can be misleading if used in equal measure for Saudi Arabia, Libya or Iran who have entirely divergent political systems. Resurgence of Islam was occasioned by deep malaise typified by widespread feeling of failure and loss of self-esteem, failed political system and stagnant economies and to an extent to the US policy towards political Islam.

The US policy of support to hard-liner repressive Islamic regimes making democratic and non-violent opposition as a non-viable option and US tolerance of "democratic exceptions" in many Islamic countries on grounds dictated by Cold War dynamics are now being accepted as having been counterproductive to Western interests. Added to this fallacy has been perhaps the cardinal sin of total US support of Israel in the Arab-Israel dispute dictated partially by the dynamics of US domestic politics as opposed to the realization by large number of Europeans that Israel poses the greatest danger to global security.

Thoughtful Muslims are skeptical about US neutrality in brokering a Middle East peace. As Professor Stephen Zunes keeps on reminding the fact that from the time of the crusades through European colonization and the Iraq war western Christians killed far more Muslims than has been the case in reverse and the Muslims have a very strong sense of this historical fact.

Albeit Christian oppression was not confined to the Islamic world and had victims across a wide spectrum of different religionists as evidenced by the Rwandan carnage inflicted by the Catholics on their co-religionists; and the non-differential racism practiced in the US between followers of the same faith. The intra-religion conflicts between the Catholics and the Protestants as between the Shiias and the Sunnis diminish the claim of

moral superiority of one religion over another. Such claim is not only irreverent and pugnacious but is fraught with the risk of losing the quintessence of the "greatness" of the different faiths.

Political parties like Jamaat-e-Islami have, despite universal condemnation through out the Islamic world of the carnage of nine-eleven, raised questions as to whether radical Islam can constitute a serious alternative to Western liberal democracy. If one were to take Afghanistan as an example one would find that despite the chaos that envelops Afghanistan most of the people seem relieved at being freed from the repressive Taliban

regime. In case of the Iranians after more than two decades of clerical rule it is generally believed that the youth who constitute the majority of the Iranian population would like to live in a freer and more liberal society.

Empirical study on Islamists and terrorists found them to belong "significantly above the average in their generation." It has been said that like fascism, Marxism-Leninism in their heydays, militant Islam attracts highly competent, motivated and ambitious individuals. But militant Islam is also a function of poverty and the spread of free market and capitalism leading to islands of prosperity is probably an important factor in the rise of political Islam. The West may be well advised to look for a solution less confrontational and more based on diplomatic and economic engagements so that militant Islam loses its support within the Islamic world.

Undoubtedly, President Bush's declaration that US respects the faith of Islam; former British Foreign Secretary's admission of the existence of Christian, Jewish and Sikh fundamentalists along with Muslim fundamentalists; and Tony Blair's call to reach out to the Arabs and the Muslims would deny militant Islam political space it seeks.

Because throughout history Western hard power has only been successful when broadly supported by the people, it is essential that the voters, in the present case in Bangladesh, are warned of the societal and economic exclusion in the global community essential for socio-economic development of the country that they exercise their franchise, not for a life of tranquility after death but one in which they and their children can live in peace and prosperity in this life.

Kazi Anwarul Masud is a former Secretary and Ambassador.