ISLAMIC TERRORISM
The new war
against terrorism which is being waged against the network which is run by
Osama bin Laden has brought with it predictable questions about cause.
"What has America done to inspire such hatred?" is the refrain.
American policy is responsible for attacks against America is the assumption.
So, to stop the conflict America must change its policy.
This assessment is based on
false assumptions about the nature of Islamic Fundamentalism. We know that war
is always the result of a genuine conflict of interests, but the conflict here
is not between Islam and the West, but between different types of Islam. The
West is only relevant as a reference point. The rules of the conflict, simply
put, is that you measure how successful your strand of Islam is vis a vis the
West.
A similar phenomenon can be
found in other conflicts. Different strands of Irish Nationalism, for instance,
measure their successes and failures with reference to Britain. The difference
is that the conflict between different types of Irish Nationalism is a result
of the conflict between Irish Nationalists and Britain. The tension between the
West and Islam, on the other hand, is a result of the conflict between
different interpretations of Islam
This conflict has its roots in
the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the Great War in 1918, and with it the
end of Muslim's ability to see themselves as one of the world's great political
powers. The Empire fragmented into states, most of which were to one degree or
another under the influence of the European colonial states. These countries
were faced with the challenge of coming to terms with modernity.
The first way that people tried
to do this was by developing secular, modernist governments. Examples include
Kemal Attaturk's Turkey, the Shah's Iran, Nasser's Arab Nationalism and Iraqi
Ba'athism. The assumption was that Muslim's had to be more like the West if it
was to solve its problems and regain its preeminent political position.
The second response was to
reject modernity and Western values. The assumption was that Muslim's had lost
their position because they were not good enough Muslim's. They had been
corrupted by foreign values. This rejection of Modernist Islamic politics is
the origin of Islamic Revivalism, what we in the West call Fundamentalism.
It is important to recognize
that this conflict originates within the Islamic world because it is only an
accurate diagnosis of the problem which can lead to a cure. If the conflict is
essentially an Islamic one, then the responsibility for resolving it lies in
the Muslim world. This has clear implications for the way in which the war on
terrorism should be conducted.
The first implication is that
the war has to be conducted. Osama bin Laden's network is not motivated by
resentment about American policy. They don't hate what America does. They hate
what America is. It is clear that this violence will not stop unless America
and its allies stop it. Killing Americans, in the mind of Osama's followers,
demonstrates the superiority of his brand of Islam over the version followed by
the various Islamic governments.
The second is that it becomes
vital that the battle for hearts and minds is won. Balancing these two things
is the great challenge which faces Western governments. It is clear that Osama
wants to portray himself as fighting effectively for Islam against the West.
The West must not allow this interpretation to become the accepted one. A
genuine dialogue between the Western and the Islamic worlds is desperately
needed. It should take place at all levels, not just between governments. The
Internet can be used to allow views to be exchanged between ordinary people.
The third is that America and
its allies cannot go to war with Islamic fundamentalism - that is not its'
fight. What we can do is establish a firm precedent that that the means used by
the terrorists who attacked America will not be tolerated by the world. Groups
which use such tactics will be opposed by all necessary means and governments
which shelter such groups, which have always been the bane of anti-terrorist
efforts within the rule of international law, will be stopped from doing so.
This is a new sort of war and
it must be conducted in a new way. But no one should be in any doubt that it is
a war which needs to be fought.
