Print
Email
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedInI am back online. I am also in England for the week, so I may be posting at slightly odd hours — at least for Americans.
The subway and bus bombings in London happened just before I arrived in England. My heart goes out to all those personally touched by such terrorism.
I certainly hope the bombings will only strengthen existing international efforts to work together to track Al Qaeda and related terrorist networks.
I liked much of what Mr. Zakaria had to say today. But I intend to leave further commentary on the best strategy to defeat terrorism to others.
i read what mr zakaria had to say. i did not like it much.
so many of the words that we use are loaded with implications even before we start to attempt rational discussion. bombing civilian populations in an attempt to undermine their morale dates, in my mind, from the 1940s.
in 697 a d – a synod of the (international, celtic) church met at birr, county offaly, ireland, some 30 miles from here, under adomnan of iona. they passed new laws to protect women, children, and non-combatants in times of war.
so we have all actually become less civilised over the last 1,300 years. it is not – what can we do about them. it is – what can we do about us.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1ca3e8b6-efda-11d9-bd3b-00000e2511c8.html
This article covers real issues at the heart of the moslem world without which you cannot stop voilence.
unrelated comment — i have been having some difficulty with moveable type. it seems my post on china is now up. but i thought it was up about an hour ago, and it disappeared … so no guarantees. and there is a certain risk it will appear twice.
Wish I could read the FT article…but subscription, alas.
As far as Zakaria is concerned, I read it but am none the more enlightened.
.
There is not justification for killing innocent civilians whether its in London or New York or Palestine or Iraq.
Moslems do not hate the freedom in US or UK but appreciate it. They dont hold anything against the people of the west but sincerely believe that most of them are honest and hard working people. The problems are with the foreign policy.
Moslems strongly believe that this same freedom will not work in Moslems world as Islam strictly prohibits Drugs, Alcohol, Interest, Adultery.
Blind support to Israel, corrupt royal families and brutual dictators in the oil rich moslem nations in Central Asia and middle east are the root causes of this hatred.
Arming Israel and at the same time invading moslem nations to stop spread of weapons is gonna result in more hatred & bloodshed.
Chechnya,Palestine,Iraq, Kashmir are long standing issues that the world continue to overlook simply because they have to do with Islam.
With a population of over 1.3 Billion people and over 56 Islamic countries, they are not at all represented in any of the international bodies like UN, Nato, EU, G8.
The breaking of Indonesia in 2000 by the west and Iraq war has enraged moslem masses and istaking them towards a militant posture to defend their lands in the absence of any armies or weapons at their disposal for defense.
Images like those from US prisons in Guantanamo, Abu gharib that humiliate Moslems will only add to an unending fire in the moslem world.
Over a million deaths in Iraq with sanctions, Genocide in Bosnia, Kosovo, Uzbekistan, Pleastine can never be erased from the hearts and minds of this generation.
US has basically encircled the moslem lands. air and water with the most dreadful weapons which can never make moslems feel secure about US intentions.
Islam is a 1400+ yrs old religion and is still the fastest growing religion in the world including Europe and US. It is grossly misrepresented in the Media in the west. Islam prohibits the taking of any innocent life.
Some go to the extent of calling even Prophet Mohammed PBUH a terrorist.
Some great non moslems about Prophet Moahmmed
Voted the Greatest ever by Time Magzine
Michael Hart in ‘The 100, A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons In History,’ New York, 1978.
My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the secular and religious level. …It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity. …It is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history.
James Michener in ‘Islam: The Misunderstood Religion,’ Reader’s Digest, May 1955, pp. 68-70.
“No other religion in history spread so rapidly as Islam. The West has widely believed that this surge of religion was made possible by the sword. But no modern scholar accepts this idea, and the Qur’an is explicit in the support of the freedom of conscience.”
“Muhammad, the inspired man who founded Islam, was born about A.D. 570 into an Arabian tribe that worshiped idols. Orphaned at birth, he was always particularly solicitous of the poor and needy, the widow and the orphan, the slave and the downtrodden. At twenty he was already a successful businessman, and soon became director of camel caravans for a wealthy widow. When he reached twenty-five his employer recognizing his merit, proposed marriage. Even though she was fifteen years older, he married her and as long as she lived remained a devoted husband.”
“Like almost every major prophet before him, Muhammad fought shy of serving as the transmitter of God’s word sensing his own inadequacy. But the Angel commanded ‘Read’. So far as we know, Muhammad was unable to read or write, but he began to dictate those inspired words which would soon revolutionize a large segment of the earth: “There is one God”.”
“In all things Muhammad was profoundly practical. When his beloved son Ibrahim died, an eclipse occurred and rumors of God ‘s personal condolence quickly arose. Whereupon Muhammad is said to have announced, ‘An eclipse is a phenomenon of nature. It is foolish to attribute such things to the death or birth of a human being’.”
“At Muhammad’s own death an attempt was made to deify him, but the man who was to become his administrative successor killed the hysteria with one of the noblest speeches in religious history: ‘If there are any among you who worshiped Muhammad, he is dead. But if it is God you Worshiped, He lives for ever’.”
A. S. Tritton in ‘Islam,’ 1951
The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur’an in the other is quite false.
Reverend Bosworth Smith in ‘Muhammad and Muhammadanism,’ London, 1874.
“Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without the Pope’s pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life.”
“In Mohammadanism every thing is different here. Instead of the shadowy and the mysterious, we have history….We know of the external history of Muhammad….while for his internal history after his mission had been proclaimed, we have a book absolutely unique in its origin, in its preservation….on the Substantial authority of which no one has ever been able to cast a serious doubt.”
Edward Montet, ‘La Propagande Chretienne et ses Adversaries Musulmans,’ Paris 1890. (Also in T.W. Arnold in ‘The Preaching of Islam,’ London 1913.)
“Islam is a religion that is essentially rationalistic in the widest sense of this term considered etymologically and historically….the teachings of the Prophet, the Qur’an has invariably kept its place as the fundamental starting point, and the dogma of unity of God has always been proclaimed therein with a grandeur a majesty, an invariable purity and with a note of sure conviction, which it is hard to find surpassed outside the pale of Islam….A creed so precise, so stripped of all theological complexities and consequently so accessible to the ordinary understanding might be expected to possess and does indeed possess a marvelous power of winning its way into the consciences of men.”
I agree wholeheartedly that the West is only part of the equation motivating radical islam. Its a known fact that even arab countries have been victims of terrorism:
Saudi Arabia has had several instances where security forces have shot it out with terrorists:
http://www.cfr.org/pub7087/rachel_bronson_rachel_abramson/terror_in_saudi_arabia_does_the_government_have_a_grip.php
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.182245760&par=0
Jordan has also had its share of terrorism:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3070513/
So to say that this is a problem that uniquely affects that west is also wrong.
Yet I can’t help but feel that the United States involvement in the Middle East and its desire to control the vast oil reserves of Iraq certainly haven’t helped the situation. In fact we have created a training ground ofr Islamic extremist everywhere “camp Iraq”.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7460-2005Jan13.html
Another problem is extreme repression in the arab world by supporting governments which harshly repress their people we’ve created social pressure that requires some sort of outlet.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1030-03.htm
Although the situation per see is not of the West doing we are certainly players in the game. Our thirst for imported oil makes our involvement in the region a given.
Yet there are other players as well as well who seek to maintain access to the oil namely: India and China who seek to feed their expanding economies:
http://www.energybulletin.net/921.html
So what do the events in London mean? I think they have implications that go far beyond Islam, terrorism and the West’s need for energy. All these things somehow come together like the flour and batter mix of a cake in the oven. What sort of cake we will have after everything finishes cooking is anyone’s guess.
Another problem is extreme repression in the arab world by supporting governments which harshly repress their people we’ve created social pressure that requires some sort of outlet.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1030-03.htm
http://www.roubiniglobal.com/setser/archives/2005/07/has_a_slowing_c_1.html doesnt work
I thought Zakaria’s analysis of the declining economic impact of terrorist attacks was interesting.
“Economic activity is perhaps the best measure of the psychological response to terrorism. Do people get scared, stay home, refuse to travel and shop less? Or do they come to the view that life goes on? Overwhelmingly, much of the world appears to have arrived at the latter position. And in doing so, people have robbed the terrorists of their most potent weapon.”
I also worry that his point that London was in many ways more prepared for a relatively low-tech terrorist bombing of the public transportation infrastructure than still vulnerable US cities may be true.
Does Islam really allow the killing of innocent unbelievers?
This is one misunderstanding that keeps rising up against Islam. Islam does not in anyway allow for the killing of any innocent soul. I have gathered some of the Noble Verses that I am aware of that deal directly with war and peace to shed some light upon my readers.
Noble Verses that order the killing of the enemies:
Let us look at Noble Verses 9:28-29 “O ye believe! Truly the pagans are unclear; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear povery, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, For Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, from among the people of the book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Let us look at Noble Verse 9:5 “Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”
As we clearly see in the above Noble Verses, the laws of killing the unbelievers or the pagans were for particular and specific times, and not for all times and all places. Notice the quotes “…after this year…” and “…when the sacred months have passed…”.
It is important to know that when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him started preaching Islam, he had to deal with 360 Arab pagan tribes at first, and he and his followers had to go through a lot of battles that were imposed upon them by the pagans who were threatened by the new System and Wonderful Religion of Islam.
Noble Verses that deal with peace:
“Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: ‘O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness.’ (The Noble Quran, 18:86)” In this Noble Verse we see that if the enemy wants to do us harm, then we must punish those who did us harm. Otherwise, we must treat the enemy civilians and the innocents with kindness.
Let us look at Noble Verse 45:14 “Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not look forward to the days of Allah: It is for Him to recompense (for good or ill) each people according to what they have earned.”
Let us look at Noble Verse 5:32 “…if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people…” In this Noble Verse we clearly see that Allah Almighty honors all the innocent souls that He created. Killing any innocent soul is so hated by Allah Almighty that He considers it as a crime against all of Mankind.
Let us look at Noble Verse 25:68 “Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; – and any that does this (not only) meets punishment.” In this Noble Verse we clearly see that Allah Almighty considers the innocent soul “sacred”. He will punish those who kill the innocent souls (by throwing them in hell).
Let us look at Noble Verse 2:182 “But if anyone fears partiality or wrong-doing on the part of the testator, and makes peace between (The parties concerned), there is no wrong in him: For God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”
Let us look at Noble Verse 2:224 “And make not God’s (name) an excuse in your oaths against doing good, or acting rightly, or making peace between persons; for God is One Who heareth and knoweth all things.”
I’d say, this Noble Verse clearly proves my point: Let us look at Noble Verse 8:61 “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).” In this Noble Verse, we clearly see Allah Almighty ordering us, the Muslims, to incline toward peace when the enemy inclines toward peace. This proves that Islam is not a religion for wars, but for peace.
Allah Almighty orders Muslims in the Noble Quran to allow total freedom of choice to people and to never try to force them into Islam; “Let there be no compulsion (forcing others) in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:256)” The Noble Quran prohibits Muslims to force any person into Islam. Muslims must not let people resent Islam and Muslims. They must leave people decide for themselves because the “Truth stands out clear from error…(2:256)”
Compulsion is incompatible with religion: Because (1) religion depends upon faith and will, and these would be meaningless by force; (2) Truth and Error have been so clearly shown up by the mercy of Allah Almighty that there should be no doubt in the minds of any persons of good will as to the fundamentals of faith; (3) Allah Almighty’s protection is continuous, and His Plan is always to lead us from the depths of darkness into the clearest light.
In the above Noble Verses, we clearly see that Allah Almighty orders the Muslims to be forgiving to the enemies and to make peace and peace making their top priority. It is part of the Muslim’s morals to be a peaceful person.
Muslims start their greetings with “As’salamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatu Allah Wa Barakatuh”, which means in English “May GOD’s peace, mercy and blessings be upon you.”
I have no problem with the courage to continue one’s life as usual and that includes more than just shopping; certainly, Iraqis and Palestinians and Israelis have to do this in spades.
I heard the echoes of Bush in Zakaria’s comment: Go to the mall. Shop. Instead, we should have been thinking, really hard. I came close to losing my own son in 911.
I think it is high time we address the issues.
The money we spent on Iraq would have better gone to addressing the real issues.
I wish there were a way of addressing the causes without getting involved with religion or being accused of being anti-Semitic or anti-Arab. Two great leaders gave their lives to solve this problem: Yitzhak Rabin and Anwar Sadat. Both are sorely missed.
If we do not rationally approach the issue, then the hotheads among us will lead us to all to wrack and ruin. And, if the pessimists among us are correct about the coming energy crisis and growing inequity of wealth and power—and yes, a really hard landing—, then what we are witnessing now will be a mild prologue of the nightmare to come.
Stormy-
Here is the FT Article
The west’s role in Islam’s war of ideas
Published: July 9 2005 03:00 | Last updated: July 9 2005 03:00
The cataclysmic attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 2001 created a small but influential industry, arguing through and on behalf of the Bush administration that the Islamist perpetrators of that atrocity “hate us for our freedoms”. That they loathe us for our values, for what we are and think rather than anything we do.
ADVERTISEMENT
If only that were true. What we face, instead, is a war of ideas within the Muslim and Arab world. In that light, this is a delusionary proposition, which conveniently absolves us from having to re-examine critically our policies towards this world.
Although we do not know for sure who carried out Thursday’s vicious attacks on London, it was very likely part of the loose and protean franchise of fanatics inspired by 9/11 and its architects, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. But we cannot wait for the precise answer. We need now to engage fiercely with the substance of the problems that are proliferating jihadi terrorism. We need to find ways of isolating this minority before they make any further inroads into the Muslim mainstream.
The most important thing to recognise is how the great democratic wave that freed east and central Europe, Latin America and swaths of sub-Saharan Africa over the past two decades ran into the sands of the Middle East, leaving the Arabs marooned in tyranny. That was in no small part because the US and its main allies shored up local despots in the interests of stability and cheap oil.
These tyrants laid waste to the entire spectrum of political expression in their countries, leaving their adversaries no alternative but to fall back on the mosque. That, in turn, suited their purposes, enabling them to blackmail their western patrons: back us, or deal with the mullahs. There is probably no greater single source of rage in the Arab world than this collusion in tyranny and repression – not even the Israel-Palestine conflict, which, furthermore, is manipulated by Arab rulers as an alibi for maintaining their national security states on a spurious war footing.
The overwhelming majority of Muslims do not hate us for our freedoms. They do, however, despise these policies and some of the more frustrated among them are thereby prey to the siren songs of the jihadis.
Validation of this analysis came last September from the Defense Science Board (DSB), a federal advisory committee to the US defence secretary. The polls the DSB looked at are chilling. People in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, for example, Washington’s main Arab allies, gave a 98 and 94 per cent “unfavourable” rating to the US and its policies. But at the same time, the DSB study found that majorities or pluralities in the Arab countries do support values such as freedom and democracy, embrace western science and education, and like US products and movies. “In other words, they do not hate us for our values, but because of our policies,” the DSB says, before demonstrating how hatred of the policies has begun to tarnish the appeal of the values.
Compounding this disenchantment, a great many Arabs are sceptical about American intentions. For the most part, Arabs plausibly believe it was Osama bin Laden who smashed the status quo, not George W. Bush. Why? Because the 9/11 attacks made it impossible for the west and its Arab despot clients to continue to ignore a political set-up that incubated blind rage against them. The subsequent decision to invade Iraq further undermined the status quo, but in ways it is not obvious the Bush administration had thought through.
This January’s elections in Iraq saw a remarkable display of heroism by its people that struck a deep chord in Arab countries. Yet however much the triumphalists in Washington claim this as vindication for their bungled strategy, these elections took place at the insistence of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who vetoed three schemes by the US-led occupation authorities to shelve or dilute them. By that time, moreover, Iraq had started on the road to a sectarian war that may end by sucking in its neighbours: with Shia Iran on one side and Sunni rulers terrified by the empowerment of Iraq’s Shia majority on the other.
The policies of the US and its allies often seem contradictory, at a time when great clarity is needed. Mr Bush rightly attacked the “cultural condescension” that suggests Arabs and Muslims are unsuited to democracy nearly two years ago in a speech to the National Endowment for Democracy. More recently, and in Cairo, Condoleezza Rice, his secretary of state, announced that after 60 years of backing stability at the expense of democracy and getting neither, the US has learnt its lesson. But has it?
The answer is vital, because the jihadis need the story of the last 60 years to continue. They need the US to keep shoring up tyranny and defending the status quo. Of course, democracy alone will not resolve the problems of the Middle East. It will, moreover, often be antithetical to short-term stability, since it is Islamist movements that are emerging as the region’s centre of political gravity. But if the west continues to collude with local despots in denying their peoples freedom, we will lose that war of ideas. The jihadis will enter the Muslim mainstream, and continue their tactics of immolation. The shared values of Islam and the west will wither.
Sam,
Thanks. It is a thoughtful piece.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/bush/story/0,7369,612355,00.htmlc
Stormy — The decision to invade Iraq can be undone, alas. This may not be the best place to start, but we are where we are.
I don’t fault President Bush for his go out and shop line — though it was not expressed in the most elegant way. In broad terms, the us does need to shop less and save more, but sudden changes after a terrorist strike would still be disruptive to the ecnonomy. I do fault the President for not asking for a broader sacrifice to support the war — or at least no current sacrifice. Financing the war with debt never struck me as a great idea.
I also thought this line in Zakaria accurately criticized the Bush administration’s basic response to the tragedy. Slogans are not a policy.
“To realize victory, we have to understand this struggle is more complex than we have been led to believe. Simple slogans telling us we fight terrorists in Iraq so that we will not have to fight them here, are just that: slogans, not comprehensive policies. In fact, as London shows, terrorists can fight in two places at the same time. Or three. Or 10. And the great danger, of course, is that they can fight with dangerous weapons. The calculus of terror would change irrevocably if one of these splinter groups were ever to get its hands on nuclear materials or biological pathogens. So far the Bush administration has not given this danger the priority it urgently requires.”
Such criticism has a bit more force when it comes from people like Zakaria, who see themselves as part of the conservative foreign policy tradition.