|
View
Point Abid
Ullah Jan What scares U.S. the most? Despite the immense powers at its disposal, who or what scares America? The answer
to this question has far-reaching implications for strategy, public diplomacy,
and foreign and domestic policy of all nations. The answer is so obvious; but
our denial makes it go up in smoke before our eyes. The
answer lies in the New York Times editorials. Earlier it called “not
invoking Shari´ah” in Afghan constitution as ““promising
aspirations,” and its reference to the Qur´an as “the troubling
aspect.” [2] What hurts
the US? Two main culprits have emerged from global discourse since Sept.
11: terrorism
and Islam. Some say the US is at war with terrorism.
Others believe it is Islam. The truth, more subtle, lies between the two — it
is application of the essence of Islam. Daniel
Pipes is one hundred per cent right when he says war on terrorism makes no
sense. He is right
when he says the establishment in the US pretends that
the enemy is terrorism “because it finesses some delicate questions
about Islam, thereby making it easier to build an international coalition
or minimize
domestic repercussions.” It is however getting hard by the day to hide the real objectives of this
war. The American dilemma is that Islam as a way of life cannot be defeated
with missiles and bombs. Professing Islam is no problem at all. It is practicing
Islam that threatens and is gradually made illegal. So, the
war is waged on those who want to live by Islam — Muslims, who
live, in Daniel Pipes words, “with a specific set of beliefs.” Thomas
Friedman considers them Muslim with specific ideas which should be defeated
with a “war on ideas.” In Daniel
Pipes´s view, “the Western "street" prefers
to see the problem lying with the Islamic religion.” Accordingly, “Muslims
have been the leading enemy of Christians for more than a millennium, remain
so now and will long continue to fill this role.”[3] Such pronouncements
led to a strategic shift in the US approach. War on Islam was for nearly
two millennia a European phenomenon; now it is basically an American one. The establishment
in Washington, however, is not naïve to publicly espouse
Daniel Pipes´s description of the American “street.” The
reasons: a) A public declaration of a war on Islam will make them lose the military
heads and their militantly secular culture in places like Turkey, Pakistan
and Algeria; b) It is impossible to convert 1.3 billion Muslim from Islam; c) The US cannot quarantine all the Muslims living in the West, and d) It can never win the clash with Islamic civilization, which many Americans
now firmly believe is underway. Fingering Islam directly, in short, neither explains the problem with Washington
nor offers a solution. So, finger what undermines the status quo of the elite
that rules the world. Target the alternative to the twisted democracy and laws
of the global elite, which in fact threaten the entire humanity. Thus,
allies in the war on Islam embraced a third way of approaching the “problem,” which
satisfies all these requirements. That approach
calls for publicly declaring that Islam itself is not the issue. At the same
time,
it requires the Western warriors to: a) thwart implementation
of Islam and demonize development of an alternative model by delegitimizing
it as “political Islam,” and b) to isolate Muslims who resist
surrendering to the laws of global elite and refuse compromising the basic
principles of
the Qur´an and Sunnah. The war
on Islam can easily be won through labeling the essence of Islam the “political,
extremist variant” and call the watered down, impracticable version as “moderate” and “liberal” Islam. “Followers
of such a watered down version of Islam are hardly distinguishable from followers
of other ideologies. Liberal Islam” is presented and advocated as the
true Islam. In fact, it does not believe Shari´ah is any more implementable
in modern world. It is anti-Jihad, anti-Hadith and anti-many basic principles
of the Qur´an. The reason
for promoting such versions of Islam is obvious. For example, it takes out
the concept
of Jihad and all resistance to occupation in Afghanistan,
Iraq, or Palestine becomes terrorism. Take out Shari´ah and some basic
principles of the Qur´an and Sunnah and the way of life and values
advocated by Thomas Friedman suddenly become all too permissible. What else
for him could
be winning the war of ideas? Allah
orders Muslims to live by his laws otherwise they will be disbelievers, oppressors
and wicked
in His sight (Qur´an, 5:44 - 47). Paul Bremer tells
them, “It can´t be law until I sign it." Elevating
themselves to this godly status is the result of an effective strategy: weaken
the Muslim
faith by keeping them away from the Qur´an. Rewrite
their constitutions in which living by Shari´ah should be declared Haram
(forbidden) by the respective chief occupiers of the land. Daniel Pipes suggests: “Fight
it militarily, diplomatically, legally, intellectually and religiously. Fight
it in Afghanistan, in Saudi Arabia, in the United States— in fact,
everywhere.” Pipes
believes “moderate” Muslims as “key allies in this
fight.” Yes, they are. According to the New York Times´ victorious
tone, (editorial, Nov. 14, 2003) there is no reference to Shari´ah in
Afghanistan constitution and Bremer has threatened that there would be no place
for it in Iraq. “Moderates” have paved the way for it. “Moderates” accept
it this way. Muslims did not. Muslims
clinging to their faith and Qur´an are labeled as “evil.” In
Pipes´s view, “such euphemisms in wartime can be beneficial,” because
it “shied away [the US government] from specifics lest they tie its
hands.” The beauty
of Daniel Pipes write ups is that he does not twist words like Bush or Friedman.
In this
case he clearly says that by labeling the staunch
believers of Islam as "evildoers" without “mentioning any names
beyond Osama bin Laden” offers “maximum flexibility.”[4] As a result,
to neutralize what scares America the most — the application
of Islam; the essence of Qur´an and Sunnah— Shari´ah has
been reduced to a curse. It has no place in the modern world. The Qur´an
is presented as a hard to interpret moral guide. No one´s interpretation
of the Qur´an is valid, except the “moderates.” On the other hand practicing Muslims are weak and intimidated these days,
but they are crucial if the Muslim world has to help the West emerge from the
current bout of radicalism and the Muslim world from the depth of humiliation. Once the
Americans understand the real objectives of their rulers behind the on going
war, they can emerge
as a formidable force. The going will remain
tough unless besides Muslims, the Americans also identify proponents of
this needless war and find the strength forthrightly to address the problem
of
American fear from the Islam´s potential to provide a far better alternative
to the twisted democracy and descript secular way of life. This is what scares
masters of international terror and control the most. February 17, 2004 Notes [1] “U.S. May Veto Islamic Law in Iraq: Top U.S. Administrator in Iraq,
Touting Women´s Rights, Threatens Veto of Islamic Law Measure,” The
Associated Press, February 16, 2003. [2] Editorial, November 14, 2003 [3] Daniel
Pipes, “Aim the War on Terror at Militant Islam,” Los
Angeles Times, January 6, 2002 [4] Daniel
Pipes, “Who Is the Enemy?” Commentary,
January 2002. http://www.danielpipes.org/article/103 |
Shoba Sama-o-Basr
(Multimedia Department)