A Veil on the Truth
By Cynthia Peters
A few privileged Afghan women have been caught smiling for AP cameras, but many Afghan women, men and children are silently dying behind the burqa of U.S. deceit.
The facts are simple. Massive food distribution programs put in place prior to 9-11 in response to widespread famine were derailed by the anticipation of and then the actual U.S. bombing campaign, and have been even further set back by the Taliban's retreat. According to the New York Times (11/30/01), "In the past two weeks, the tonnage [of aid] delivered dropped to a pace less than half of what it had been in the previous two weeks." The problem is that the "towns and cities are so chaotic that relief agencies cannot safely operate. Many roads are off limits because of lawlessness and banditry."
Those of us who opposed the U.S. war in A fghanistan nevertheless saw its apparent rapid resolution as an opportunity to at least get much needed supplies into the country. Having routed the enemy, perhaps the United States would stop the bombing, allowing food trucks to move in from across the border. But, instead, the opposite is true. As of this writing (December 5), the bombing continues, civilian populations are left at the mercy of marauding gangs, and food aid dwindles.
There are a few simple things we could do that would immediately turn down the torture in Afghanistan.
First, the U.S. should stop bombing. There is no real accounting yet of the civilian casualty rate, but reports in the last few days claim that U.S. bombs hit four villages near Tora Bora, possibly killing hundreds (NYT 12/3/01). This is an unethical and illegal use of U.S. firepower. If it's Osama bin Laden who we are still after, it is never too late to apprehend him in a manner that accords with international law -- present proper evidence and allow the UN to mount a prudent, ground-based multilateral campaign to capture him. In any case, since there is no Afghan enemy mounting any kind of defense or engaging in battle, there is no excuse for large-scale bombings -- whether directed by the U.S. or the UN.
Second, the bridge to Uzbekistan, which is a key passage for aid trucks, should be secured. And we should meet Uzbekistan's demand that an international force provide security at their Afghan border. Instead American military officials are saying that although they "recognize the urgency of opening the bridge from Uzbekistan, [U.S.] troops will not be protecting the border."
There is callous disregard for human life in this casual acknowledgement of the urgency. American officials understand the consequences of their inactivity, but are blithely sitting back and saying they want Afghan forces -- not foreign troops -- to police the roadways, when the only Afghan forces that exist in the country are "lawless bandits," and it is American officials themselves that installed them. Having destabilized the country to the point where it is not even safe for aid trucks to travel, it seems the U.S. is washing its hands of the disaster.
If only that were the case.
Instead, the U.S. is actually blocking efforts to bring in the very peacekeepers that might secure the roads and borders, and facilitate the transport of life-saving aid. Buried in an article about how the Northern Alliance, during negotiations in Bonn, finally relented on allowing foreign peacekeepers into the country, the Boston Globe
(11/30/01) reported that some U.S. officials believe peacekeepers will be a nuisance to their unilateral conduct of the war. "Citing Bush Administration officials, the Washington Post reported that `the U.S. Central Command, which oversees the war in Afghanistan, is opposing the imminent deployment of peacekeepers in areas freed from Taliban control out of concern this could encumber U.S. military operations.'"
In a New York Times article (12/3/01) about the Bonn negotiations, a brief aside mentions the "Pentagon's unwillingness to take part in any peacekeeping force or to favor placing peacekeepers anywhere where they could get in the way of the war against Al Qaeda." Specifically, since November 12 when the Northern Alliance took Kabul, the Pentagon has blocked proposals by France and Britain to send thousands of troops to secure Kabul, the northern half of the country, and aid routes. On December 4, the Pentagon said it would "not object to peacekeepers confined to Kabul and its immediate vicinity" -- a concession that is mostly symbolic (only 200 peacekeepers will be admitted) and is nonetheless entirely irrelevant to ensuring open channels for aid (NYT 12/5/01).
Third, the U.S. should reconsider food airdrops. Dropping "Humanitarian Daily Rations" -- bright yellow packages, decorated with the American flag and containing 2200 calories worth of peanut butter, shortbread, and fruit pastries -- is counterproductive. Airdrops undermine the work of neutral aid organizations by turning humanitarian assistance into an attempt to win "hearts and minds." They ignore the special needs of malnourished children who require a specific diet. "If you would give peanut butter to a severely malnourished child, you are likely to do more harm than good," says Lucas Van den Broeck of Action Against Hunger (Boston Globe 10/25/01). And the airdrops bypass crucial distribution methods, which ensure food gets to all who need it, not just to those nimble enough to gather the yellow packets as they drop from the skies, assuming, that is, that they land where people can reach them and not among land mines (10 million of which litter the Afghan landscape). According to at least one UN report (Boston Globe, 11/30/01), two children have already been killed "when they stepped on mines running across a field trying to pick up food packets."
We won't see pictures of their exploded bodies in the morning newspaper because those images are a theat to the Pentagon's ongoing prosecution of the "war on terrorism." Those images must stay safely shrouded from public view. While the media showcase the newly revealed faces of Afghan women, the innocent victims of the U.S. war are still thickly veiled.
This is a veil that U.S. citizens have the power to lift, and the consequences of doing so are immense. We should expose and demand an end to a war that has turned Afghanistan into a world stage for the theatrical display of U.S. might and banal disregard for human life.
Monday, 14 March 2011
Bravado fades away as rebels prepare for last stand in Benghazi
Bravado fades away as rebels prepare for last stand in Benghazi
Gaddafi's demoralised foes are in retreat. Kim Sengupta reports from Brega
Monday, 14 March 2011
Share Close
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Comments
Print Email Text Size
NormalLargeExtra Large
AFP/GETTY
Libyan rebels prepare to leave the town of Brega yesterday
enlarge Sponsored Links
Ads by Google
HSBC Offshore
Living Abroad Can Be Challenging -
Find Out How HSBC Can Assist You.
Offshore.HSBC.com/Expat-Experts
Expat? £60K+ UK Pension?
Free Expert Advice To Access Your
Personal Or Occupational UK Pension
yourQROPS.expatra.com/HMRCapproved
New Model for Middle East
Using Business to Promote Peace,
Prosperity and Freedom
www.sellingavisionofhope.org
Employee for your Company
Advertise Your Company and Seek
Potential Candidates on Quikr Now!
www.Quikr.com
The sandstorm added to the terror and panic; one could hear the shrill sound of the shells and rockets coming in but had no idea where they would land until the shattering noise of the explosion and orange flames lit up the swirling dust.
All around the rebel fighters were in flight, with screeching tyres on trucks and cars, some piled on a mechanical digger, others running beside the vehicles desperate for a ride to safety. Anti-aircraft guns and rocket launchers had been abandoned. A few were on fire. Brega was lost, and the road to Benghazi lay wide open.
With the rebel forces in disarray and Muammar Gaddafi's forces pressing ahead, only Western action would now save what was briefly "Free Libya". And that, most of the opposition are convinced, is now a forlorn hope.
Related articles
Fighters and residents flee eastwards as Gaddafi forces advance
Patrick Cockburn: Arab League call for a no-fly zone may be too little, too late
Leading article: Meanwhile in Libya...
Search the news archive for more stories
With their hold on Brega, which had followed the capture of Ras Lanuf, the regime now controls two key oil ports, putting them in a position to shut down power to the rebel-held east of the country. The two towns are also key points on the coastal route, putting Gaddafi's forces within three hours' drive of Benghazi, with just one other town, Azdabia, on the way. Taking Brega will also bring with it an airport, allowing the military to bring in reinforcements.
The exodus of rebel forces from Brega began on Saturday evening. It was complete by yesterday afternoon, with convoys of fighters outstripping the few residents trying to make a getaway along the road.
Some of the locals who stayed behind paid a terrible price. Dr Suleiman Refadi found four bodies lying on the road, a couple in their fifties, and two men in their early twenties. "They had been shot many times. They were civilians. Why were they murdered?" he asked. "The fighting should be limited to soldiers, not these innocent people."
The soldiers were no longer in the mood to fight. Just a week ago these men were dreaming of a triumphant entry into Tripoli. Now they were a beaten army, fear and uncertainty replacing the bravado.
Yassin Mawafaq, a 22-year-old baker and revolutionary volunteer, had been posing with his Kalashnikov assault rifle for the cameras, firing off round after round into the air and vowing he would rather be a martyr than fail in his mission. Now the only thing on his mind was how to stay alive. Hunched in the back of a battered Toyota Corolla, he whispered: "A rocket landed near us. I saw a man with half his body blown off. We need to get away. We cannot stay here, we need to get away."
Standing by the roadside, Ibrahim Husseini was still carrying his anti-tank missile launcher. He was tired and resigned. "I want to stay and fight, but the others are going. They have much better weapons than us, we could not match them. Too many people have been killed. We need to find out why it went wrong."
Some of the questions could be addressed to the rebel leadership in Benghazi. On Saturday, General Abdel Fattah-Younis, a former regime interior minister whom William Hague had consulted before sending the mission which ended with British special forces soldiers being arrested, said there would be a counter-attack, which would rapidly reclaim lost ground. "Yes, the Gaddafi men control Ras Lanuf and the oil terminal, but this is only temporary. We shall recover them. We shall take back Ras Lanuf, at the latest by Sunday," he said. "We have got a plan and we are carrying it out."
On Saturday evening a group of shivering rebel fighters standing at a checkpoint in Brega got a fleeting visit from a commander in Benghazi. "Do not worry, we have 50 tanks now in Azdabia, they are coming up. We shall attack as soon as they arrive."
Yesterday the same officer, who refused to give his name, was at the main gate of Azdabia, loudly claiming that Gaddafi forces were fighting among themselves in Misrata and some had switched sides to the rebels. These tales have been coming since the uprising began and many were by now openly sceptical.
"I do not think I believe any of this any longer," said Khalid Bugaighis. "If all these soldiers are changing sides, then why are we in this position? No, it is finished here now. We need to go back to Benghazi and try and defend there. We can do street-fighting there. Maybe, in the meantime, [the international community] will bring in this no-fly zone. That will be our last chance."
But in Benghazi Gaddafi loyalists who have been lying low have become emboldened and are now carrying out attacks. "I understand that there are problems in Benghazi," said Mr Bugaighis. "But what choice have we got? That is the place of our last stand."
Gaddafi's demoralised foes are in retreat. Kim Sengupta reports from Brega
Monday, 14 March 2011
Share Close
Digg
del.icio.us
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Comments
Print Email Text Size
NormalLargeExtra Large
AFP/GETTY
Libyan rebels prepare to leave the town of Brega yesterday
enlarge Sponsored Links
Ads by Google
HSBC Offshore
Living Abroad Can Be Challenging -
Find Out How HSBC Can Assist You.
Offshore.HSBC.com/Expat-Experts
Expat? £60K+ UK Pension?
Free Expert Advice To Access Your
Personal Or Occupational UK Pension
yourQROPS.expatra.com/HMRCapproved
New Model for Middle East
Using Business to Promote Peace,
Prosperity and Freedom
www.sellingavisionofhope.org
Employee for your Company
Advertise Your Company and Seek
Potential Candidates on Quikr Now!
www.Quikr.com
The sandstorm added to the terror and panic; one could hear the shrill sound of the shells and rockets coming in but had no idea where they would land until the shattering noise of the explosion and orange flames lit up the swirling dust.
All around the rebel fighters were in flight, with screeching tyres on trucks and cars, some piled on a mechanical digger, others running beside the vehicles desperate for a ride to safety. Anti-aircraft guns and rocket launchers had been abandoned. A few were on fire. Brega was lost, and the road to Benghazi lay wide open.
With the rebel forces in disarray and Muammar Gaddafi's forces pressing ahead, only Western action would now save what was briefly "Free Libya". And that, most of the opposition are convinced, is now a forlorn hope.
Related articles
Fighters and residents flee eastwards as Gaddafi forces advance
Patrick Cockburn: Arab League call for a no-fly zone may be too little, too late
Leading article: Meanwhile in Libya...
Search the news archive for more stories
With their hold on Brega, which had followed the capture of Ras Lanuf, the regime now controls two key oil ports, putting them in a position to shut down power to the rebel-held east of the country. The two towns are also key points on the coastal route, putting Gaddafi's forces within three hours' drive of Benghazi, with just one other town, Azdabia, on the way. Taking Brega will also bring with it an airport, allowing the military to bring in reinforcements.
The exodus of rebel forces from Brega began on Saturday evening. It was complete by yesterday afternoon, with convoys of fighters outstripping the few residents trying to make a getaway along the road.
Some of the locals who stayed behind paid a terrible price. Dr Suleiman Refadi found four bodies lying on the road, a couple in their fifties, and two men in their early twenties. "They had been shot many times. They were civilians. Why were they murdered?" he asked. "The fighting should be limited to soldiers, not these innocent people."
The soldiers were no longer in the mood to fight. Just a week ago these men were dreaming of a triumphant entry into Tripoli. Now they were a beaten army, fear and uncertainty replacing the bravado.
Yassin Mawafaq, a 22-year-old baker and revolutionary volunteer, had been posing with his Kalashnikov assault rifle for the cameras, firing off round after round into the air and vowing he would rather be a martyr than fail in his mission. Now the only thing on his mind was how to stay alive. Hunched in the back of a battered Toyota Corolla, he whispered: "A rocket landed near us. I saw a man with half his body blown off. We need to get away. We cannot stay here, we need to get away."
Standing by the roadside, Ibrahim Husseini was still carrying his anti-tank missile launcher. He was tired and resigned. "I want to stay and fight, but the others are going. They have much better weapons than us, we could not match them. Too many people have been killed. We need to find out why it went wrong."
Some of the questions could be addressed to the rebel leadership in Benghazi. On Saturday, General Abdel Fattah-Younis, a former regime interior minister whom William Hague had consulted before sending the mission which ended with British special forces soldiers being arrested, said there would be a counter-attack, which would rapidly reclaim lost ground. "Yes, the Gaddafi men control Ras Lanuf and the oil terminal, but this is only temporary. We shall recover them. We shall take back Ras Lanuf, at the latest by Sunday," he said. "We have got a plan and we are carrying it out."
On Saturday evening a group of shivering rebel fighters standing at a checkpoint in Brega got a fleeting visit from a commander in Benghazi. "Do not worry, we have 50 tanks now in Azdabia, they are coming up. We shall attack as soon as they arrive."
Yesterday the same officer, who refused to give his name, was at the main gate of Azdabia, loudly claiming that Gaddafi forces were fighting among themselves in Misrata and some had switched sides to the rebels. These tales have been coming since the uprising began and many were by now openly sceptical.
"I do not think I believe any of this any longer," said Khalid Bugaighis. "If all these soldiers are changing sides, then why are we in this position? No, it is finished here now. We need to go back to Benghazi and try and defend there. We can do street-fighting there. Maybe, in the meantime, [the international community] will bring in this no-fly zone. That will be our last chance."
But in Benghazi Gaddafi loyalists who have been lying low have become emboldened and are now carrying out attacks. "I understand that there are problems in Benghazi," said Mr Bugaighis. "But what choice have we got? That is the place of our last stand."
Bahrain protests spread to financial centre
Bahrain protests spread to financial centre
* Police clash with demonstrators trying to occupy Manama’s banking centre
* Regime loyalists armed with knives, clubs fight university students
MANAMA: Bahraini police on Sunday clashed with demonstrators trying to occupy Manama’s banking centre, as protests spread from a peaceful sit-in to the heart of the strategic Gulf state’s business district.
Witnesses said police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at around 350 activists who had sealed off the Financial Harbour business complex with road blocks and a human chain. Some 200 people were overcome by the gas which wafted through the heart of the wealthy harbour side area, while the interior ministry said 14 policemen were injured. Thousands of protesters however returned to the area later in the afternoon, residents said.
Regime loyalists armed with knives and clubs meanwhile fought students at the university, and police fired tear gas at protesters occupying Pearl Square, which is a short distance from the financial district, witnesses said. “The regime is using thugs,” said Khalil Marzooq, who is a member of the main Shia opposition group.
King Hamad bin Issa al-Khalifa reiterated an offer of dialogue with the main opposition groups, which have refused to negotiate until the government resigns and dissidents are released from jail. “I call all parties to meet quickly around the table and be open-minded and well-intentioned to reach a national consensus,” he said in a statement quoted by the BNA state news agency, after a meeting with Jordan’s foreign minister.
Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, who joined King Hamad in talks on Saturday with visiting US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, has also urged the opposition to come to the negotiating table. “I’m hopeful that they will join the dialogue without preconditions. We have given them the best deal they can hope for,” he told reporters Saturday.
Meanwhile, Bahrain’s main trade union announced an open-ended strike starting on Sunday to protest the use of force against protesters. “This is in violation of human rights and international conventions ratified by the kingdom of Bahrain,” said the General Federation of Workers Trade Unions.
The Iranian-backed Shia Lebanese movement Hezbollah condemned “the excessive use of violence to suppress peaceful demonstrations by the people of Bahrain who are seeking to secure their legitimate political rights.”
Bahrain — home of the US Fifth Fleet — has become a regional financial hub as it seeks to diversify its economy away from a dependence on diminishing oil revenues. Protests in Shia-majority Bahrain, which has been ruled by a Sunni dynasty for more than 200 years, broke out after popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia ousted those countries’ long-time autocratic rulers. The main opposition groups have stopped short of demanding the toppling of the king, but more extreme hardliners have been vocal in calling for the end of monarchy.
Gates said he told Bahrain’s leaders to quickly adopt far-reaching reforms or risk being swamped by the tide of democratic change sweeping the Arab world. He also warned that Shia-led Iran would likely work to use Bahrain’s sectarian tensions to its advantage. The US defence chief said he came away encouraged the country’s leaders king were prepared to accommodate anti-government protesters.
With unrest sweeping the Middle East and North Africa, the United States has struggled to balance its long standing ties with Arab regimes with support for protests demanding democratic reform. afp
* Police clash with demonstrators trying to occupy Manama’s banking centre
* Regime loyalists armed with knives, clubs fight university students
MANAMA: Bahraini police on Sunday clashed with demonstrators trying to occupy Manama’s banking centre, as protests spread from a peaceful sit-in to the heart of the strategic Gulf state’s business district.
Witnesses said police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at around 350 activists who had sealed off the Financial Harbour business complex with road blocks and a human chain. Some 200 people were overcome by the gas which wafted through the heart of the wealthy harbour side area, while the interior ministry said 14 policemen were injured. Thousands of protesters however returned to the area later in the afternoon, residents said.
Regime loyalists armed with knives and clubs meanwhile fought students at the university, and police fired tear gas at protesters occupying Pearl Square, which is a short distance from the financial district, witnesses said. “The regime is using thugs,” said Khalil Marzooq, who is a member of the main Shia opposition group.
King Hamad bin Issa al-Khalifa reiterated an offer of dialogue with the main opposition groups, which have refused to negotiate until the government resigns and dissidents are released from jail. “I call all parties to meet quickly around the table and be open-minded and well-intentioned to reach a national consensus,” he said in a statement quoted by the BNA state news agency, after a meeting with Jordan’s foreign minister.
Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, who joined King Hamad in talks on Saturday with visiting US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, has also urged the opposition to come to the negotiating table. “I’m hopeful that they will join the dialogue without preconditions. We have given them the best deal they can hope for,” he told reporters Saturday.
Meanwhile, Bahrain’s main trade union announced an open-ended strike starting on Sunday to protest the use of force against protesters. “This is in violation of human rights and international conventions ratified by the kingdom of Bahrain,” said the General Federation of Workers Trade Unions.
The Iranian-backed Shia Lebanese movement Hezbollah condemned “the excessive use of violence to suppress peaceful demonstrations by the people of Bahrain who are seeking to secure their legitimate political rights.”
Bahrain — home of the US Fifth Fleet — has become a regional financial hub as it seeks to diversify its economy away from a dependence on diminishing oil revenues. Protests in Shia-majority Bahrain, which has been ruled by a Sunni dynasty for more than 200 years, broke out after popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia ousted those countries’ long-time autocratic rulers. The main opposition groups have stopped short of demanding the toppling of the king, but more extreme hardliners have been vocal in calling for the end of monarchy.
Gates said he told Bahrain’s leaders to quickly adopt far-reaching reforms or risk being swamped by the tide of democratic change sweeping the Arab world. He also warned that Shia-led Iran would likely work to use Bahrain’s sectarian tensions to its advantage. The US defence chief said he came away encouraged the country’s leaders king were prepared to accommodate anti-government protesters.
With unrest sweeping the Middle East and North Africa, the United States has struggled to balance its long standing ties with Arab regimes with support for protests demanding democratic reform. afp
A Memo to American Muslims
A Memo to American Muslims
"It is time that we acknowledge that the freedoms we enjoy in the US are more desirable to us than superficial solidarity with the Muslim World. If you disagree, then prove it by packing your bags and going to whichever Muslim country you identify with."
In the wake of September 11, Dr. M. A. Muqtedar Khan calls for soul searching, reflection and reassessment among US Muslims.
In the name of Allah, the most Benevolent and the Most Merciful. May this memo find you in the shade of Islam enjoying the mercy, the protection and the grace of Allah.
I am writing this memo to you all with the explicit purpose of inviting you to lead the American Muslim community in soul searching, reflection and reassessment.
What happened on September 11th in New York and Washington DC will forever remain a horrible scar on the history of Islam and humanity. No matter how much we condemn it, and point to the Quran and the Sunnah to argue that Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the fact remains that the perpetrators of this crime against humanity have indicated that their actions are sanctioned by Islamic values.
The fact that even now several Muslim scholars and thousands of Muslims defend the accused is indicative that not all Muslims believe that the attacks are unIslamic. This is truly sad.
Even if it were true that Israel and the US are enemies of the Muslim World, wonder what is preventing them from unleashing their nuclear arsenal against Muslims, a response that mercilessly murders thousands of innocent people, including hundreds of Muslims is absolutely indefensible. If anywhere in your hearts there is any sympathy or understanding with those who committed this act, I invite you to ask yourself this question, would Muhammad (pbuh) sanction such an act?
While encouraging Muslims to struggle against injustice (Al Quran 4:135), Allah also imposes strict rules of engagement. He says in unequivocal terms that to kill an innocent being is like killing entire humanity (Al Quran 5:32). He also encourages Muslims to forgive Jews and Christians if they have committed injustices against us (Al Quran 2:109, 3:159, 5:85).
Muslims, including American Muslims have been practicing hypocrisy on a grand scale. They protest against the discriminatory practices of Israel but are silent against the discriminatory practices in Muslim states. In the Gulf one can see how laws and even salaries are based on ethnic origin. This is racism, but we never hear of Muslims protesting against them at International fora.
The Israeli occupation of Palestine is perhaps central to Muslim grievance against the West. While acknowledging that, I must remind you that Israel treats its one million Arab citizens with greater respect and dignity than most Arab nations treat their citizens. Today Palestinian refugees can settle and become citizens of the United States but in spite of all the tall rhetoric of the Arab world and Quranic injunctions (24:22) no Muslim country except Jordan extends this support to them.
While we loudly and consistently condemn Israel for its ill treatment of Palestinians we are silent when Muslim regimes abuse the rights of Muslims and slaughter thousands of them. Remember Saddam and his use of chemical weapons against Muslims (Kurds)?. Remember Pakistani army’s excesses against Muslims (Bengalis)?. Remember the Mujahideen of Afghanistan and their mutual slaughter? Have we ever condemned them for their excesses? Have we demanded international intervention or retribution against them? Do you know how the Saudis treat their minority Shias? Have we protested the violation of their rights? But we all are eager to condemn Israel; not because we care for rights and lives of the Palestinians, we don’t. We condemn Israel because we hate “them".
Muslims love to live in the US but also love to hate it. Many openly claim that the US is a terrorist state but they continue to live in it. Their decision to live here is testimony that they would rather live here than anywhere else. As an Indian Muslim, I know for sure that nowhere on earth, including India, will I get the same sense of dignity and respect that I have received in the US. No Muslim country will treat me as well as the US has. If what happened on September 11th had happened in India, the biggest democracy, thousands of Muslims would have been slaughtered in riots on mere suspicion and there would be another slaughter after confirmation. But in the US, bigotry and xenophobia has been kept in check by media and leaders. In many places hundreds of Americans have gathered around Islamic centers in symbolic gestures of protection and embrace of American Muslims. In many cities Christian congregations have started wearing hijab to identify with fellow Muslim women. In patience and in tolerance ordinary Americans have demonstrated their extraordinary virtues.
It is time that we acknowledge that the freedoms we enjoy in the US are more desirable to us than superficial solidarity with the Muslim World. If you disagree than prove it by packing your bags and going to whichever Muslim country you identify with. If you do not leave and do not acknowledge that you would rather live here than anywhere else, know that you are being hypocritical.
It is time that we faced these hypocritical practices and struggled to transcend them. It is time that American Muslim leaders fought to purify their own lot.
For over a decade we have watched as Muslims in the name of Islam have committed violence against other Muslims and other peoples. We have always found a way to reconcile the vast distance between Islamic values and Muslim practices by pointing out to the injustices committed upon Muslims by others. The point however is this – our belief in Islam and commitment to Islamic values is not contingent on the moral conduct of the US or Israel. And as Muslims can we condone such inhuman and senseless waste of life in the name of Islam?
The biggest victims of hate filled politics as embodied in the actions of several Muslim militias all over the world are Muslims themselves. Hate is the extreme form of intolerance and when individuals and groups succumb to it they can do nothing constructive. Militias like the Taliban have allowed their hate for the West to override their obligation to pursue the welfare of their people and as a result of their actions not only have thousands of innocent people died in America, but thousands of people will die in the Muslim World.
Already, half a million Afghans have had to leave their homes and their country. The war has not yet begun. It will only get worst. Hamas and Islamic Jihad may kill a few Jews, women and children included, with their suicide bombs and temporarily satisfy their lust for Jewish blood, but thousands of Palestinians then pay the price for their actions.
The culture of hate and killing is tearing away at the moral fabric of the Muslim society. We are more focused on “the other” and have completely forgotten our duty to Allah. In pursuit of the inferior jihad we have sacrificed the superior jihad.
Islamic resurgence, the cherished ideals of which pursued the ultimate goal of a universally just and moral society has been hijacked by hate and call for murder and mayhem. If Bin Laden were an individual then we would have no problem. But unfortunately Bin Laden has become a phenomenon -- a cancer eating away at the morality of our youth, and undermining the spiritual health of our future.
Today the century old Islamic revival is in jeopardy because we have allowed insanity to prevail over our better judgment. Yes, the US has played a hand in the creation of Bin Laden and the Taliban, but it is we who have allowed them to grow and gain such a foothold. It is our duty to police our world. It is our responsibility to prevent people from abusing Islam. It is our job to ensure that Islam is not misrepresented. We should have made sure that what happened on Sept. 11th should never have happened.
It is time the leaders of the American Muslim community woke up and realized that there is more to life than competing with the American Jewish lobby for power over US foreign policy. Islam is not about defeating Jews or conquering Jerusalem. It is about mercy, about virtue, about sacrifice and about duty. Above all it is the pursuit of moral perfection. Nothing can be further away from moral perfection than the wanton slaughter of thousands of unsuspecting innocent people.
I hope that we will now rededicate our lives and our institutions to the search for harmony, peace and tolerance. Let us be prepared to suffer injustice rather than commit injustices. After all it is we who carry the divine burden of Islam and not others. We have to be morally better, more forgiving, more sacrificing than others, if we wish to convince the world about the truth of our message. We cannot even be equal to others in virtue, we must excel.
It is time for soul searching. How can the message of Muhammad (pbuh) who was sent as mercy to mankind become a source of horror and fear? How can Islam inspire thousands of youth to dedicate their lives to killing others? We are supposed to invite people to Islam not murder them.
The worst exhibition of Islam happened on our turf. We must take first responsibility to undo the evil it has manifest. This is our mandate, our burden and also our opportunity.
"It is time that we acknowledge that the freedoms we enjoy in the US are more desirable to us than superficial solidarity with the Muslim World. If you disagree, then prove it by packing your bags and going to whichever Muslim country you identify with."
In the wake of September 11, Dr. M. A. Muqtedar Khan calls for soul searching, reflection and reassessment among US Muslims.
In the name of Allah, the most Benevolent and the Most Merciful. May this memo find you in the shade of Islam enjoying the mercy, the protection and the grace of Allah.
I am writing this memo to you all with the explicit purpose of inviting you to lead the American Muslim community in soul searching, reflection and reassessment.
What happened on September 11th in New York and Washington DC will forever remain a horrible scar on the history of Islam and humanity. No matter how much we condemn it, and point to the Quran and the Sunnah to argue that Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the fact remains that the perpetrators of this crime against humanity have indicated that their actions are sanctioned by Islamic values.
The fact that even now several Muslim scholars and thousands of Muslims defend the accused is indicative that not all Muslims believe that the attacks are unIslamic. This is truly sad.
Even if it were true that Israel and the US are enemies of the Muslim World, wonder what is preventing them from unleashing their nuclear arsenal against Muslims, a response that mercilessly murders thousands of innocent people, including hundreds of Muslims is absolutely indefensible. If anywhere in your hearts there is any sympathy or understanding with those who committed this act, I invite you to ask yourself this question, would Muhammad (pbuh) sanction such an act?
While encouraging Muslims to struggle against injustice (Al Quran 4:135), Allah also imposes strict rules of engagement. He says in unequivocal terms that to kill an innocent being is like killing entire humanity (Al Quran 5:32). He also encourages Muslims to forgive Jews and Christians if they have committed injustices against us (Al Quran 2:109, 3:159, 5:85).
Muslims, including American Muslims have been practicing hypocrisy on a grand scale. They protest against the discriminatory practices of Israel but are silent against the discriminatory practices in Muslim states. In the Gulf one can see how laws and even salaries are based on ethnic origin. This is racism, but we never hear of Muslims protesting against them at International fora.
The Israeli occupation of Palestine is perhaps central to Muslim grievance against the West. While acknowledging that, I must remind you that Israel treats its one million Arab citizens with greater respect and dignity than most Arab nations treat their citizens. Today Palestinian refugees can settle and become citizens of the United States but in spite of all the tall rhetoric of the Arab world and Quranic injunctions (24:22) no Muslim country except Jordan extends this support to them.
While we loudly and consistently condemn Israel for its ill treatment of Palestinians we are silent when Muslim regimes abuse the rights of Muslims and slaughter thousands of them. Remember Saddam and his use of chemical weapons against Muslims (Kurds)?. Remember Pakistani army’s excesses against Muslims (Bengalis)?. Remember the Mujahideen of Afghanistan and their mutual slaughter? Have we ever condemned them for their excesses? Have we demanded international intervention or retribution against them? Do you know how the Saudis treat their minority Shias? Have we protested the violation of their rights? But we all are eager to condemn Israel; not because we care for rights and lives of the Palestinians, we don’t. We condemn Israel because we hate “them".
Muslims love to live in the US but also love to hate it. Many openly claim that the US is a terrorist state but they continue to live in it. Their decision to live here is testimony that they would rather live here than anywhere else. As an Indian Muslim, I know for sure that nowhere on earth, including India, will I get the same sense of dignity and respect that I have received in the US. No Muslim country will treat me as well as the US has. If what happened on September 11th had happened in India, the biggest democracy, thousands of Muslims would have been slaughtered in riots on mere suspicion and there would be another slaughter after confirmation. But in the US, bigotry and xenophobia has been kept in check by media and leaders. In many places hundreds of Americans have gathered around Islamic centers in symbolic gestures of protection and embrace of American Muslims. In many cities Christian congregations have started wearing hijab to identify with fellow Muslim women. In patience and in tolerance ordinary Americans have demonstrated their extraordinary virtues.
It is time that we acknowledge that the freedoms we enjoy in the US are more desirable to us than superficial solidarity with the Muslim World. If you disagree than prove it by packing your bags and going to whichever Muslim country you identify with. If you do not leave and do not acknowledge that you would rather live here than anywhere else, know that you are being hypocritical.
It is time that we faced these hypocritical practices and struggled to transcend them. It is time that American Muslim leaders fought to purify their own lot.
For over a decade we have watched as Muslims in the name of Islam have committed violence against other Muslims and other peoples. We have always found a way to reconcile the vast distance between Islamic values and Muslim practices by pointing out to the injustices committed upon Muslims by others. The point however is this – our belief in Islam and commitment to Islamic values is not contingent on the moral conduct of the US or Israel. And as Muslims can we condone such inhuman and senseless waste of life in the name of Islam?
The biggest victims of hate filled politics as embodied in the actions of several Muslim militias all over the world are Muslims themselves. Hate is the extreme form of intolerance and when individuals and groups succumb to it they can do nothing constructive. Militias like the Taliban have allowed their hate for the West to override their obligation to pursue the welfare of their people and as a result of their actions not only have thousands of innocent people died in America, but thousands of people will die in the Muslim World.
Already, half a million Afghans have had to leave their homes and their country. The war has not yet begun. It will only get worst. Hamas and Islamic Jihad may kill a few Jews, women and children included, with their suicide bombs and temporarily satisfy their lust for Jewish blood, but thousands of Palestinians then pay the price for their actions.
The culture of hate and killing is tearing away at the moral fabric of the Muslim society. We are more focused on “the other” and have completely forgotten our duty to Allah. In pursuit of the inferior jihad we have sacrificed the superior jihad.
Islamic resurgence, the cherished ideals of which pursued the ultimate goal of a universally just and moral society has been hijacked by hate and call for murder and mayhem. If Bin Laden were an individual then we would have no problem. But unfortunately Bin Laden has become a phenomenon -- a cancer eating away at the morality of our youth, and undermining the spiritual health of our future.
Today the century old Islamic revival is in jeopardy because we have allowed insanity to prevail over our better judgment. Yes, the US has played a hand in the creation of Bin Laden and the Taliban, but it is we who have allowed them to grow and gain such a foothold. It is our duty to police our world. It is our responsibility to prevent people from abusing Islam. It is our job to ensure that Islam is not misrepresented. We should have made sure that what happened on Sept. 11th should never have happened.
It is time the leaders of the American Muslim community woke up and realized that there is more to life than competing with the American Jewish lobby for power over US foreign policy. Islam is not about defeating Jews or conquering Jerusalem. It is about mercy, about virtue, about sacrifice and about duty. Above all it is the pursuit of moral perfection. Nothing can be further away from moral perfection than the wanton slaughter of thousands of unsuspecting innocent people.
I hope that we will now rededicate our lives and our institutions to the search for harmony, peace and tolerance. Let us be prepared to suffer injustice rather than commit injustices. After all it is we who carry the divine burden of Islam and not others. We have to be morally better, more forgiving, more sacrificing than others, if we wish to convince the world about the truth of our message. We cannot even be equal to others in virtue, we must excel.
It is time for soul searching. How can the message of Muhammad (pbuh) who was sent as mercy to mankind become a source of horror and fear? How can Islam inspire thousands of youth to dedicate their lives to killing others? We are supposed to invite people to Islam not murder them.
The worst exhibition of Islam happened on our turf. We must take first responsibility to undo the evil it has manifest. This is our mandate, our burden and also our opportunity.
Memo to Americans
Memo to Americans
In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Americans are asking, why are some Muslims so angry at the US that they would perpetrate such an inhuman act? And how could Islam be a source of motivation or justification for such an act? Muqtedar Khan, Ph.D. offers some insights.
October 29th, 2001
Dear Americans,
I hope this memo finds you all well on the way to recovery. I pray that God, who is most merciful and most benevolent, will be with you every step of the way as you recover from the collective anguish and fear precipitated by the events of Sept 11. God promises in the Quran (2:286) that He does not burden a soul beyond its capacity to bear pain. He will keep his promise.
The catastrophic attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have raised several questions about Islam and militant Muslims. The chief among them are, why are some Muslims so angry at the US that they would perpetrate such an inhuman act? An even more puzzling question is how could Islam or any religion be a source of motivation or justification for such an act?
Before we answer the above questions, I want to thank all those wonderful Americans (specially President Bush) who came out to protect American Muslims, their mosques and their properties from a xenophobic backlash. I congratulate you for displaying such humanity and safeguarding the American way even under such adverse and challenging circumstances. May Allah reward you all and this nation for its restraint. As it is the American Muslim community feels beleagured, ostracized, marginalized and scared; those of you who came out in our support made a big difference.
Now I turn to the difficult task of making the events of Sept. 11th intelligible. I need your patience and your understanding to accomplish this. It is important to clarify that in spite of its gross inhumanity, the attack on America is certainly not the most egregious of crimes against humanity. The Spanish inquisition, the holocaust, the genocide in Bosnia, the systematic elimination of the native American population, the ethnic cleansings in Africa, and Cambodia, and even the atrocities against the Bosnians are in sheer number of casualties much bigger crimes. One may also recall that in India nearly 50,000 Sikhs were slaughtered in less than a week as revenge for the assassination of Indira Gandhi in early 1980s. The attack on American is significant because of its spectacular nature, its target – the world’s sole superpower – and the fact that a part of it was caught on tape.
Why are Muslims Angry at the US?
There are several theories being advanced by various commentators explaining why Muslims generally hate the United States. The silliest of them is the one that the Bush administration and the conservative elements in America entertain. They insist that Binladen and other Islamic militants hate America because they hate American values of freedom and democracy. Nothing can be further from the truth. Indeed most Muslims are great admirers of democracy and freedom and insist that these values are not only consistent with Islam but were the bedrock of the glorious Islamic civilization. They point to the diversity, tolerance and harmony at the peak of Islamic civilization to substantiate their claims.
As Islamic awareness increases in postcolonial Muslim societies and Islamic activists try to rebuild their civilization they find that the economically motivated alliance between secular authoritarian regimes in the Muslim world and the West, in particular the US, is the biggest barrier to freedom, democracy and self determination. Turkey, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait are just a few examples of states were non-democratic regimes thrive and repress popular movements with US support.
In 1953 a CIA coup replaced the democratic government of Muhammad Mossadeq in Iran with a monarchy so that Iran could become a client serving US interests in the Middle East. In Algeria the west financed and legitimized a military coup that prevented Islamists from coming to power after winning an election. In the 1960s, and again in 1990s Turkey forced Islamists out of power, even after they had won popular mandates, with the tacit support from the US. Even now all that American establishment can think of, as an alternate to the Taliban in Afghanistan is the reinstatement of a senile monarch, not the establishment of democracy.
The utter lack of peaceful channels for protest and dissent in the entire Arab world has slowly radicalized most moderate Islamic oppositions. The use of brutal force by secular regimes has further incited reactionary violence from Islamic militias. There is also a false notion circulating that Islam and democracy are incompatible. Today nearly 650 million Muslims live in democratic societies. As of now there are two Muslim nations with over a 100 million people that have women heads of state – Indonesia and Bangladesh. The US has not had one in over 220 years!
It is not a hatred of democracy and freedom but the desire for one that has made many Muslims hate the US whom they blame for the perpetuation of undemocratic polities in their world. Surely there are some Muslims who argue that democracy like everything Western is UnIslamic and evil. Fortunately such misguided people are few and have very little influence in the Muslim World.
Many Muslims also believe that the US is inherently opposed to Islam and Muslims. Binladen for one has claimed that by maintaining troops in Saudi Arabia (to protect the monarchy from any popular revolutions) the US actually occupies the two most important Muslim holy sites, Mecca and Medina. And through Israel, which is seen as an outpost of Western imperialism in the Arab world, the US occupies Jerusalem the third most holy Muslim city.
Add to this the systematic destruction of Iraq, the death of over half a million Iraqi children through US sponsored sanctions, and the daily atrocities, assassinations and dispossession of the Palestinians by a US armed and funded Israeli army, it is not difficult to imagine why US is not seen as a beacon of freedom and virtue in the Muslim World.
Does this mean that angry Muslims are allowed to perpetrate collateral damages that include over 5000 innocent Americans? Certainly not. The purpose of this article is not to condone what happened on September 11th. What happened was horrible, inhuman and unIslamic. But reflection over Muslim grievances can help us understand how even devout people can be driven to commit themselves to terror. Systematic repression dispossesses people of their humanity, inciting them to commit inhuman acts.
Americans must take these grievances seriously and address them in good faith and that, in my opinion, is the best way to fight resentment, anger and the resulting violence.
How Can Islam permit/incite terror?
Any observer of the Palestinian problem, who does not nurse malice towards Islam, will understand why many Palestinians would resort to suicide bombings against Israel. Surely, if we were to equip them with F-16s and Apache helicopters they would also fight fair and square with Israel. As far as killing of innocent civilians is concerned, the Israeli army kills many times more Palestinian children than the casualties caused by suicide bombers. Those are realities of the region. Islam however, is irrelevant to the Israeli-Palestine violence.
Distorted interpretations of Islam are used by Hamas and Islamic Jihad as a rhetorical instrument for mobilization of resistance and justification of their actions. Islam specifically forbids suicide (Quran 4:29) and the killing of civilians, women and children (Bukhari: Book of Jihad). The important point is that it is not the Islamic belief of Palestinians that leads them to suicide bombing but rather the logic of the circle of violence and the hatred many of them now nurse against their occupiers. Also remember that Japanese pilots in World War II and Tamil Elam Tigers (of Buddhist and Hindu religions) have used suicide bombing more often than Muslims. Long before Hamas emerged, a suicide bomber had assassinated Rajiv Gandhi, India’s Prime Minister.
Islam, according to Max Weber, Freidrich Nietzsche and Hegel is the most practical, rational and realistic of all religions. It is this realistic element in Islam that does not fully advocate pacifism, permitting the use of force. The theory of Jihad (Struggle in the path of God) forbids violence except when 1) Muslims are not allowed to practice their faith (freedom of religion is threatened) 2) when people are oppressed and subjugated (in pursuit of freedom) and 3) when people’s land is forcibly taken from them.
Islam allows a range of responses. One can forgive the oppressor or one can respond in kind. There are Quranic sources encouraging both positions.
And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out of the places from where they drove you out, for persecution is worse than killing (2:191).
Tell those who disbelieve that if they cease persecution of believers that which is past will be forgiven them (8:38).
There is no hierarchy of verses in the Quran. Those who privilege the first verse over the second will wage war to fight injustice. And most militant Muslims invoke this verse in the defense of their actions. But then there are Muslims who privilege the second verse and seek diplomatic end to persecution through forgiveness. The two verses above are exemplary of the tension between realism and idealism in Islam. But in the final analysis Islam is what Muslims make of it.
While war in search of justice and to escape persecution is permissible in Islam, what happened on Sept. 11th certainly is not. I wonder how those Muslims responsible for the slaughter of American civilians would rationalize their actions in the light of this Quranic verse:
He who has killed one innocent soul, it is as if he has killed all humanity. And he who has saved one soul, is as if he has saved all humanity (Quran 5:32).
To my mind there is absolutely no justification and no way of rationalizing what happened on Sept. 11th. I am convinced that Islam does not shape the perpetrators’ values and their beliefs. Islam is a religion of peace and I pray that good Muslims (Quran 11:116) will rescue Islam from the clutches of those who use it for their political purposes.
Until Americans revisit their foreign policy practices and good Muslims challenge distorted interpretations of Islam consistently we may not come out of the circle of terror and counter-terror.
In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Americans are asking, why are some Muslims so angry at the US that they would perpetrate such an inhuman act? And how could Islam be a source of motivation or justification for such an act? Muqtedar Khan, Ph.D. offers some insights.
October 29th, 2001
Dear Americans,
I hope this memo finds you all well on the way to recovery. I pray that God, who is most merciful and most benevolent, will be with you every step of the way as you recover from the collective anguish and fear precipitated by the events of Sept 11. God promises in the Quran (2:286) that He does not burden a soul beyond its capacity to bear pain. He will keep his promise.
The catastrophic attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have raised several questions about Islam and militant Muslims. The chief among them are, why are some Muslims so angry at the US that they would perpetrate such an inhuman act? An even more puzzling question is how could Islam or any religion be a source of motivation or justification for such an act?
Before we answer the above questions, I want to thank all those wonderful Americans (specially President Bush) who came out to protect American Muslims, their mosques and their properties from a xenophobic backlash. I congratulate you for displaying such humanity and safeguarding the American way even under such adverse and challenging circumstances. May Allah reward you all and this nation for its restraint. As it is the American Muslim community feels beleagured, ostracized, marginalized and scared; those of you who came out in our support made a big difference.
Now I turn to the difficult task of making the events of Sept. 11th intelligible. I need your patience and your understanding to accomplish this. It is important to clarify that in spite of its gross inhumanity, the attack on America is certainly not the most egregious of crimes against humanity. The Spanish inquisition, the holocaust, the genocide in Bosnia, the systematic elimination of the native American population, the ethnic cleansings in Africa, and Cambodia, and even the atrocities against the Bosnians are in sheer number of casualties much bigger crimes. One may also recall that in India nearly 50,000 Sikhs were slaughtered in less than a week as revenge for the assassination of Indira Gandhi in early 1980s. The attack on American is significant because of its spectacular nature, its target – the world’s sole superpower – and the fact that a part of it was caught on tape.
Why are Muslims Angry at the US?
There are several theories being advanced by various commentators explaining why Muslims generally hate the United States. The silliest of them is the one that the Bush administration and the conservative elements in America entertain. They insist that Binladen and other Islamic militants hate America because they hate American values of freedom and democracy. Nothing can be further from the truth. Indeed most Muslims are great admirers of democracy and freedom and insist that these values are not only consistent with Islam but were the bedrock of the glorious Islamic civilization. They point to the diversity, tolerance and harmony at the peak of Islamic civilization to substantiate their claims.
As Islamic awareness increases in postcolonial Muslim societies and Islamic activists try to rebuild their civilization they find that the economically motivated alliance between secular authoritarian regimes in the Muslim world and the West, in particular the US, is the biggest barrier to freedom, democracy and self determination. Turkey, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait are just a few examples of states were non-democratic regimes thrive and repress popular movements with US support.
In 1953 a CIA coup replaced the democratic government of Muhammad Mossadeq in Iran with a monarchy so that Iran could become a client serving US interests in the Middle East. In Algeria the west financed and legitimized a military coup that prevented Islamists from coming to power after winning an election. In the 1960s, and again in 1990s Turkey forced Islamists out of power, even after they had won popular mandates, with the tacit support from the US. Even now all that American establishment can think of, as an alternate to the Taliban in Afghanistan is the reinstatement of a senile monarch, not the establishment of democracy.
The utter lack of peaceful channels for protest and dissent in the entire Arab world has slowly radicalized most moderate Islamic oppositions. The use of brutal force by secular regimes has further incited reactionary violence from Islamic militias. There is also a false notion circulating that Islam and democracy are incompatible. Today nearly 650 million Muslims live in democratic societies. As of now there are two Muslim nations with over a 100 million people that have women heads of state – Indonesia and Bangladesh. The US has not had one in over 220 years!
It is not a hatred of democracy and freedom but the desire for one that has made many Muslims hate the US whom they blame for the perpetuation of undemocratic polities in their world. Surely there are some Muslims who argue that democracy like everything Western is UnIslamic and evil. Fortunately such misguided people are few and have very little influence in the Muslim World.
Many Muslims also believe that the US is inherently opposed to Islam and Muslims. Binladen for one has claimed that by maintaining troops in Saudi Arabia (to protect the monarchy from any popular revolutions) the US actually occupies the two most important Muslim holy sites, Mecca and Medina. And through Israel, which is seen as an outpost of Western imperialism in the Arab world, the US occupies Jerusalem the third most holy Muslim city.
Add to this the systematic destruction of Iraq, the death of over half a million Iraqi children through US sponsored sanctions, and the daily atrocities, assassinations and dispossession of the Palestinians by a US armed and funded Israeli army, it is not difficult to imagine why US is not seen as a beacon of freedom and virtue in the Muslim World.
Does this mean that angry Muslims are allowed to perpetrate collateral damages that include over 5000 innocent Americans? Certainly not. The purpose of this article is not to condone what happened on September 11th. What happened was horrible, inhuman and unIslamic. But reflection over Muslim grievances can help us understand how even devout people can be driven to commit themselves to terror. Systematic repression dispossesses people of their humanity, inciting them to commit inhuman acts.
Americans must take these grievances seriously and address them in good faith and that, in my opinion, is the best way to fight resentment, anger and the resulting violence.
How Can Islam permit/incite terror?
Any observer of the Palestinian problem, who does not nurse malice towards Islam, will understand why many Palestinians would resort to suicide bombings against Israel. Surely, if we were to equip them with F-16s and Apache helicopters they would also fight fair and square with Israel. As far as killing of innocent civilians is concerned, the Israeli army kills many times more Palestinian children than the casualties caused by suicide bombers. Those are realities of the region. Islam however, is irrelevant to the Israeli-Palestine violence.
Distorted interpretations of Islam are used by Hamas and Islamic Jihad as a rhetorical instrument for mobilization of resistance and justification of their actions. Islam specifically forbids suicide (Quran 4:29) and the killing of civilians, women and children (Bukhari: Book of Jihad). The important point is that it is not the Islamic belief of Palestinians that leads them to suicide bombing but rather the logic of the circle of violence and the hatred many of them now nurse against their occupiers. Also remember that Japanese pilots in World War II and Tamil Elam Tigers (of Buddhist and Hindu religions) have used suicide bombing more often than Muslims. Long before Hamas emerged, a suicide bomber had assassinated Rajiv Gandhi, India’s Prime Minister.
Islam, according to Max Weber, Freidrich Nietzsche and Hegel is the most practical, rational and realistic of all religions. It is this realistic element in Islam that does not fully advocate pacifism, permitting the use of force. The theory of Jihad (Struggle in the path of God) forbids violence except when 1) Muslims are not allowed to practice their faith (freedom of religion is threatened) 2) when people are oppressed and subjugated (in pursuit of freedom) and 3) when people’s land is forcibly taken from them.
Islam allows a range of responses. One can forgive the oppressor or one can respond in kind. There are Quranic sources encouraging both positions.
And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out of the places from where they drove you out, for persecution is worse than killing (2:191).
Tell those who disbelieve that if they cease persecution of believers that which is past will be forgiven them (8:38).
There is no hierarchy of verses in the Quran. Those who privilege the first verse over the second will wage war to fight injustice. And most militant Muslims invoke this verse in the defense of their actions. But then there are Muslims who privilege the second verse and seek diplomatic end to persecution through forgiveness. The two verses above are exemplary of the tension between realism and idealism in Islam. But in the final analysis Islam is what Muslims make of it.
While war in search of justice and to escape persecution is permissible in Islam, what happened on Sept. 11th certainly is not. I wonder how those Muslims responsible for the slaughter of American civilians would rationalize their actions in the light of this Quranic verse:
He who has killed one innocent soul, it is as if he has killed all humanity. And he who has saved one soul, is as if he has saved all humanity (Quran 5:32).
To my mind there is absolutely no justification and no way of rationalizing what happened on Sept. 11th. I am convinced that Islam does not shape the perpetrators’ values and their beliefs. Islam is a religion of peace and I pray that good Muslims (Quran 11:116) will rescue Islam from the clutches of those who use it for their political purposes.
Until Americans revisit their foreign policy practices and good Muslims challenge distorted interpretations of Islam consistently we may not come out of the circle of terror and counter-terror.
Muslims Must Develop an Intolerance for Intolerance
Muslims Must Develop an Intolerance for Intolerance
We made you a nation of moderation and justice (Quran; 2:143)
To advocate what is right and forbid what is wrong (Quran, 3:110).
In the aftermath of Sept. 11th, ordinary Americans displayed an extraordinary resolve to preempt any backlash against American Muslims. President Bush described those who commit acts of bigotry as those who are from among the worst of people. American leaders at all levels took special measures to ensure that the lives, the mosques and the properties of Muslims were safe. Under extremely testing circumstances, the American people displayed a remarkable commitment to tolerance and intolerance for bigotry. In this display of respect for diversity, Muslims need to catch up with the Americans.
As moderate Muslims struggle with extremists like bin Laden and the Taliban to interpret and represent Islam, they must adopt a policy of containment towards anyone and everyone who seeks to advocate hatred towards any community. Moderate Muslims must not hesitate to confront those who make bigoted comments.
One of the biggest challenges that American Muslims face is the demonization of Islam. American Muslims often accuse American media and Hollywood of taking isolated cases of Muslim extremism as a pretext to label all Muslims as extremists. We demand that American media and policy makers stop painting with a wide brush and treat individual Muslims, each Muslim group, and every Muslim country on its merit. In the past few weeks, Americans have demonstrated that they have become sensitive to this and one can clearly discern a new sensitivity in the way Islam is treated and how Muslims are portrayed.
Muslims too must reciprocate. While many Muslims acknowledge the support and sensitivity of most Americans, some Muslims continue to embarrass everyone with the narrowness of their vision and the crudeness of their sentiments.
Sheik Muhammad Al-Gamei'a, the former Imam of the Islamic Cultural Center of New York, in one sentence called all Muslims stupid and all Jews as best equipped for terror. He said, “Muslims just aren't smart enough to carry something like that off [Sept. 11 attacks], only the Jews are capable of planning such an incident.”
Another Imam is said to have made disparaging remarks about Jews a few years ago; a videotape of which was recently played on local TV. He has since apologized and expressed horror at his own words. And for that he deserves to be applauded.
But statements such as these make Muslims look irrational, hateful and purveyors of conspiracy theories. When such statements are made by Islamic scholars, who hold or have held important religious positions, it not only gives Islam a bad name but also raises the question, what have these scholars been teaching their congregations?
In pluralist societies, where different ethnic, racial and religious communities live in close embrace, such bigots must not be allowed to hold influential positions.
Bigotry is a sign of ignorance and lack of ethical sensitivity. It is extremely disturbing that some Muslim scholars and Imams are displaying this anti-social trait. It is time moderate Muslims rebelled against the tyranny of intolerance in some Muslim pockets. Wasn’t there anybody in the congregations of these two mosques who would dare to stand up and tell these Imams that such sentiments have no place in the Muslim as well as the American milieu?
Sept. 11 will have a devastating impact on the future of the Islamic community. While most Americans are being extremely tolerant towards Muslims, they are also becoming more vigilant. There will be closer scrutiny of individual Muslim leaders, Muslim organizations and Muslim activities in America. The near future will be a very testing period for the American Muslim community. They will not only have to prove their loyalty to America but also their innocence.
American Muslims are in a unique position today. They know and understand the Muslim world and they know and understand the US as well. They can constitute a bridge of understanding, dialogue and peace between America and the Muslim world. The Muslim world is their origin and America is their destiny. If they do not serve as harbingers of harmony and the promoters of peace between the two, they will be betraying their past as well as their future.
To play this central role, American Muslims must not allow themselves to be marginalized either in American politics or in the Muslim world’s public sphere. If American Muslims wish their voices to be heard in America, and their advice respected and followed, the first thing they have to develop ASAP, is an extreme intolerance for intolerance and extremists.
We cannot ask the nuts to bolt their traps; censorship is neither Islamic nor the American way. But when bigots speak up, moderate and responsible voices in the American Muslim community must immediately condemn them. Let them know that those who espouse intolerance will never be our heroes.
American Muslims must avoid the impulse to blame the US (or Jews or Hindus) for all Muslim miseries. We must develop a balanced attitude towards the US. We must be critical of the US but also self-critical. We must be always willing to express our disagreements with US policies but we must also not be stingy in expressing our solidarity with the US. We must condemn all efforts, in the media or by the government that seek to profile Muslims. But simultaneously we must also be ready to condemn those who defile the old glory.
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) spent the first 40 years of his life speaking the truth and became famous as Al-Amin (the truthful) before he started preaching the Truth. Muslims must follow in his path and start condemning intolerance within, even as we demand tolerance from without.
We made you a nation of moderation and justice (Quran; 2:143)
To advocate what is right and forbid what is wrong (Quran, 3:110).
In the aftermath of Sept. 11th, ordinary Americans displayed an extraordinary resolve to preempt any backlash against American Muslims. President Bush described those who commit acts of bigotry as those who are from among the worst of people. American leaders at all levels took special measures to ensure that the lives, the mosques and the properties of Muslims were safe. Under extremely testing circumstances, the American people displayed a remarkable commitment to tolerance and intolerance for bigotry. In this display of respect for diversity, Muslims need to catch up with the Americans.
As moderate Muslims struggle with extremists like bin Laden and the Taliban to interpret and represent Islam, they must adopt a policy of containment towards anyone and everyone who seeks to advocate hatred towards any community. Moderate Muslims must not hesitate to confront those who make bigoted comments.
One of the biggest challenges that American Muslims face is the demonization of Islam. American Muslims often accuse American media and Hollywood of taking isolated cases of Muslim extremism as a pretext to label all Muslims as extremists. We demand that American media and policy makers stop painting with a wide brush and treat individual Muslims, each Muslim group, and every Muslim country on its merit. In the past few weeks, Americans have demonstrated that they have become sensitive to this and one can clearly discern a new sensitivity in the way Islam is treated and how Muslims are portrayed.
Muslims too must reciprocate. While many Muslims acknowledge the support and sensitivity of most Americans, some Muslims continue to embarrass everyone with the narrowness of their vision and the crudeness of their sentiments.
Sheik Muhammad Al-Gamei'a, the former Imam of the Islamic Cultural Center of New York, in one sentence called all Muslims stupid and all Jews as best equipped for terror. He said, “Muslims just aren't smart enough to carry something like that off [Sept. 11 attacks], only the Jews are capable of planning such an incident.”
Another Imam is said to have made disparaging remarks about Jews a few years ago; a videotape of which was recently played on local TV. He has since apologized and expressed horror at his own words. And for that he deserves to be applauded.
But statements such as these make Muslims look irrational, hateful and purveyors of conspiracy theories. When such statements are made by Islamic scholars, who hold or have held important religious positions, it not only gives Islam a bad name but also raises the question, what have these scholars been teaching their congregations?
In pluralist societies, where different ethnic, racial and religious communities live in close embrace, such bigots must not be allowed to hold influential positions.
Bigotry is a sign of ignorance and lack of ethical sensitivity. It is extremely disturbing that some Muslim scholars and Imams are displaying this anti-social trait. It is time moderate Muslims rebelled against the tyranny of intolerance in some Muslim pockets. Wasn’t there anybody in the congregations of these two mosques who would dare to stand up and tell these Imams that such sentiments have no place in the Muslim as well as the American milieu?
Sept. 11 will have a devastating impact on the future of the Islamic community. While most Americans are being extremely tolerant towards Muslims, they are also becoming more vigilant. There will be closer scrutiny of individual Muslim leaders, Muslim organizations and Muslim activities in America. The near future will be a very testing period for the American Muslim community. They will not only have to prove their loyalty to America but also their innocence.
American Muslims are in a unique position today. They know and understand the Muslim world and they know and understand the US as well. They can constitute a bridge of understanding, dialogue and peace between America and the Muslim world. The Muslim world is their origin and America is their destiny. If they do not serve as harbingers of harmony and the promoters of peace between the two, they will be betraying their past as well as their future.
To play this central role, American Muslims must not allow themselves to be marginalized either in American politics or in the Muslim world’s public sphere. If American Muslims wish their voices to be heard in America, and their advice respected and followed, the first thing they have to develop ASAP, is an extreme intolerance for intolerance and extremists.
We cannot ask the nuts to bolt their traps; censorship is neither Islamic nor the American way. But when bigots speak up, moderate and responsible voices in the American Muslim community must immediately condemn them. Let them know that those who espouse intolerance will never be our heroes.
American Muslims must avoid the impulse to blame the US (or Jews or Hindus) for all Muslim miseries. We must develop a balanced attitude towards the US. We must be critical of the US but also self-critical. We must be always willing to express our disagreements with US policies but we must also not be stingy in expressing our solidarity with the US. We must condemn all efforts, in the media or by the government that seek to profile Muslims. But simultaneously we must also be ready to condemn those who defile the old glory.
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) spent the first 40 years of his life speaking the truth and became famous as Al-Amin (the truthful) before he started preaching the Truth. Muslims must follow in his path and start condemning intolerance within, even as we demand tolerance from without.
Immigrant American Muslims and the Moral Dilemmas of Citizenship
Immigrant American Muslims and the Moral Dilemmas of Citizenship
America’s prosperity and freedom attract them and, once they are here, its policies and its attitudes toward Muslims and Islam alienate them... They love to live in America, while many of them love to hate America.
By M.A. Muqtedar Khan Ph.D.
The demonization of Islam in mainstream American media compels Muslims to become sensitive about their identity. All their activities are motivated by this identity and geared toward defending their faith from a perceived American assault. They rarely, if ever, get opportunities to live as American citizens endeavoring to maximize liberty, equality and prosperity.
Similarly the negative image of America in the eyes of most Muslims, a consequence of its foreign policy in the Middle East, elicits paradoxical responses from American Muslims. America’s prosperity and freedom attract them and, once they are here, its policies and its attitudes toward Muslims and Islam alienate them. Becoming American citizens presents an unusual moral dilemma for American Muslims. They love to live in America, while many of them love to hate America.
I once asked the president of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) at one of his talks in Washington, DC to spell out the obligations of naturalized Muslim citizens to their new country—America—keeping in mind the Qur’anic injunction (Qur’an; 9:4) that promises made must be kept (pacta sund servanda). While asserting that he was not an Islamic scholar and therefore unqualified to give an authoritative answer, the president of ICNA proceeded to give an interesting reply.
He said that, in the opinion of many scholars whom he had consulted, becoming a citizen should be understood as signing a treaty between a Muslim individual and the United States. Therefore all Muslims who make this compact with the U.S. are obliged to fulfill their obligations as proper citizens, obey the law, pay taxes and so on. He also recommended that since the U.S. has offered the option to decline military draft to new citizens, Muslims could take this option to save themselves moral dilemmas if called to fight against Muslim states. If for some reason, he said, Muslims do not like the society of the United States they must terminate their treaty and leave.
However, he added, “of course Muslims are not obliged to obey laws and policies which are specifically against Islamic beliefs.” He also recognized the opportunity for dissent and change that the U.S. constitution provides its citizens and recommended that Muslims avail themselves of this opportunity.
To most Muslims in the audience, the answer seemed rational, sensible, and even enlightened. Nevertheless, I am personally not very satisfied with his analysis. When Muslims become naturalized citizens they do not inform the U.S. government that their acceptance of U.S. citizenship is conditional. They do not make it clear to the U.S. that they will remain good citizens as long as no explicitly anti-Islamic law or policy is legislated or implemented.
Many Muslims see Islam and the U.S. in a state of conflict.
I am sure that the U.S. government would not agree to any such conditions, since after all it is the Muslim individual who is seeking association (citizenship) and not vice versa. Thus many Muslims who see Islam and the U.S. in a state of conflict have enormous problems in beginning to think of themselves as American Muslims.
They want the prosperity and the freedom of America, but not its foreign policy or its liberal culture. And Muslim leaders who oppose political assimilation without opposing naturalization inadvertently place Muslims in a morally delicate situation.
There are no simple solutions to this moral dilemma. It will have to be resolved at the theological level. Changes in American attitudes and policies toward Islam and Muslims will also be helpful in this transition to citizenship within the mind of each American Muslim. The theological discussion will have to take American Muslims beyond the dar-ul-Islam (house of peace) and dar-ul-harb (house of war) dichotomy.
The disappearance of the institution of the Caliphate, the emergence of many Muslim states—articulated as Islamic (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Sudan, Afghanistan) or as secular democracies (Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Indonesia)—and the rapid globalization of the nation-state as a result of decolonization have allowed many new terms to be invented within Muslim discourses on international relations.
These are words like dar-ul-aman (house of order) and dar-ul-kufr (house of unbelief). The term dar-ul-aman emerged in the context of Muslim politics in India.
The Case of India
India, which is a secular democracy and allows Muslims complete freedom to practice their religion and live by Islamic shariah (law), cannot be labelled dar-ul-harb since it is not hostile to Islam. Since it does not have any specific treaties with obligations to Muslims it does not qualify as dar-ul-sulh (house of treaty) or dar-ul-ahad. So, increasingly, Muslims have begun to refer to India and such countries as dar-ul-aman, house of order, where there is peace and tolerance and freedom of religion. But this term has been restricted to India in its use, perhaps because of its subcontinental origins.
Dar-ul-kufr is a state or territory which is predominantly non-Muslim but which neither has a treaty with Muslims nor is at war with them. The West has often been referred to as dar-ul-sulh , and by some as dar-ul-kufr depending upon political contingencies.
Those groups who wish to emphasize conflict between Islam and the West choose to describe the West as dar-ul-kufr, and those who choose to emphasize the peaceful and cooperative relations between Islam and the West call it dar-ul-sulh. These terms are also used in similar political discourses with respect to America.
Many American Muslims, particularly the African-American Muslims, are proud to be American citizens. They are indigenous to America and Islam has given them the dignity and self-esteem to make their lives meaningful, even as they struggle against racial discrimination.
Immigrant Muslims who share their sentiments are grateful for the opportunity that America has given them to prosper and practice their faith. They believe that America is dar-ul-sulh and that America, in many of its practices, is much more Islamic than many contemporary Muslim states.
Some immigrants, however, are of the opinion that since this is a country where Islamic shariah is not applied, it is dar-ul-kufr, the house of unbelief. In my opinion this position is held by a minority of Muslims (from both indigenous and immigrant Muslims), but this minority is more active in Muslim politics and has a disproportionate impact on the American Muslim discourses.
America’s prosperity and freedom attract them and, once they are here, its policies and its attitudes toward Muslims and Islam alienate them... They love to live in America, while many of them love to hate America.
By M.A. Muqtedar Khan Ph.D.
The demonization of Islam in mainstream American media compels Muslims to become sensitive about their identity. All their activities are motivated by this identity and geared toward defending their faith from a perceived American assault. They rarely, if ever, get opportunities to live as American citizens endeavoring to maximize liberty, equality and prosperity.
Similarly the negative image of America in the eyes of most Muslims, a consequence of its foreign policy in the Middle East, elicits paradoxical responses from American Muslims. America’s prosperity and freedom attract them and, once they are here, its policies and its attitudes toward Muslims and Islam alienate them. Becoming American citizens presents an unusual moral dilemma for American Muslims. They love to live in America, while many of them love to hate America.
I once asked the president of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) at one of his talks in Washington, DC to spell out the obligations of naturalized Muslim citizens to their new country—America—keeping in mind the Qur’anic injunction (Qur’an; 9:4) that promises made must be kept (pacta sund servanda). While asserting that he was not an Islamic scholar and therefore unqualified to give an authoritative answer, the president of ICNA proceeded to give an interesting reply.
He said that, in the opinion of many scholars whom he had consulted, becoming a citizen should be understood as signing a treaty between a Muslim individual and the United States. Therefore all Muslims who make this compact with the U.S. are obliged to fulfill their obligations as proper citizens, obey the law, pay taxes and so on. He also recommended that since the U.S. has offered the option to decline military draft to new citizens, Muslims could take this option to save themselves moral dilemmas if called to fight against Muslim states. If for some reason, he said, Muslims do not like the society of the United States they must terminate their treaty and leave.
However, he added, “of course Muslims are not obliged to obey laws and policies which are specifically against Islamic beliefs.” He also recognized the opportunity for dissent and change that the U.S. constitution provides its citizens and recommended that Muslims avail themselves of this opportunity.
To most Muslims in the audience, the answer seemed rational, sensible, and even enlightened. Nevertheless, I am personally not very satisfied with his analysis. When Muslims become naturalized citizens they do not inform the U.S. government that their acceptance of U.S. citizenship is conditional. They do not make it clear to the U.S. that they will remain good citizens as long as no explicitly anti-Islamic law or policy is legislated or implemented.
Many Muslims see Islam and the U.S. in a state of conflict.
I am sure that the U.S. government would not agree to any such conditions, since after all it is the Muslim individual who is seeking association (citizenship) and not vice versa. Thus many Muslims who see Islam and the U.S. in a state of conflict have enormous problems in beginning to think of themselves as American Muslims.
They want the prosperity and the freedom of America, but not its foreign policy or its liberal culture. And Muslim leaders who oppose political assimilation without opposing naturalization inadvertently place Muslims in a morally delicate situation.
There are no simple solutions to this moral dilemma. It will have to be resolved at the theological level. Changes in American attitudes and policies toward Islam and Muslims will also be helpful in this transition to citizenship within the mind of each American Muslim. The theological discussion will have to take American Muslims beyond the dar-ul-Islam (house of peace) and dar-ul-harb (house of war) dichotomy.
The disappearance of the institution of the Caliphate, the emergence of many Muslim states—articulated as Islamic (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Sudan, Afghanistan) or as secular democracies (Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Indonesia)—and the rapid globalization of the nation-state as a result of decolonization have allowed many new terms to be invented within Muslim discourses on international relations.
These are words like dar-ul-aman (house of order) and dar-ul-kufr (house of unbelief). The term dar-ul-aman emerged in the context of Muslim politics in India.
The Case of India
India, which is a secular democracy and allows Muslims complete freedom to practice their religion and live by Islamic shariah (law), cannot be labelled dar-ul-harb since it is not hostile to Islam. Since it does not have any specific treaties with obligations to Muslims it does not qualify as dar-ul-sulh (house of treaty) or dar-ul-ahad. So, increasingly, Muslims have begun to refer to India and such countries as dar-ul-aman, house of order, where there is peace and tolerance and freedom of religion. But this term has been restricted to India in its use, perhaps because of its subcontinental origins.
Dar-ul-kufr is a state or territory which is predominantly non-Muslim but which neither has a treaty with Muslims nor is at war with them. The West has often been referred to as dar-ul-sulh , and by some as dar-ul-kufr depending upon political contingencies.
Those groups who wish to emphasize conflict between Islam and the West choose to describe the West as dar-ul-kufr, and those who choose to emphasize the peaceful and cooperative relations between Islam and the West call it dar-ul-sulh. These terms are also used in similar political discourses with respect to America.
Many American Muslims, particularly the African-American Muslims, are proud to be American citizens. They are indigenous to America and Islam has given them the dignity and self-esteem to make their lives meaningful, even as they struggle against racial discrimination.
Immigrant Muslims who share their sentiments are grateful for the opportunity that America has given them to prosper and practice their faith. They believe that America is dar-ul-sulh and that America, in many of its practices, is much more Islamic than many contemporary Muslim states.
Some immigrants, however, are of the opinion that since this is a country where Islamic shariah is not applied, it is dar-ul-kufr, the house of unbelief. In my opinion this position is held by a minority of Muslims (from both indigenous and immigrant Muslims), but this minority is more active in Muslim politics and has a disproportionate impact on the American Muslim discourses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)