The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood has always remained the same: to reestablish Sharia rule in Egypt and elsewhere, whether by peaceful or violent means. And now, despite the best efforts of the Mubarak regime (which, like the Nasser and Sadat regimes before it, has tried to keep the Ikhwan at bay with a combination of force and concessions) to limit its influence, it is gaining strength in Egypt. However the Islamist group has now won 76 seats -- more than five times the number it held in the outgoing chamber.On Thursday Oct 6, 2005 George W. Bush took great care to differentiate between Muslims at large, and was judicious in efforts not to use the term "Islamist" sweepingly - understanding full well that, some of Washington's Muslim allies notably in Iraq, also are Islamists. The classic Islamic narrative today is, that the evil crusading didn't stop until colonialism extended over almost all Muslims. But there was a time when Muslims too reveled in their accomplishments, their war campaigns once they were forced out of the increasing dessert lands. Nations don't simply take over parts of the world by mistake or overnight, and People in general do not convert en masse to religions other then their own. One could argue of course that state Religions and forced conversion to the belief of the ruler were the accepted norm in many parts of the world in that era. Qur'an chapter 9, verse 29, states: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth even if they are the people of the book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and fell themselves subdued."
The financial and diplomatic influence of Islamist sympathizers in Europe and the U.S.A. initially fostered an obfuscation of the facts regarding the true nature of jihadist ideology, and that universities across the country, particularly Middle East Studies departments, are complicit in this. Many college textbooks, for example, gloss over the violent, expansionist nature of early Islamic history.
Understood as “a call for action” by its adherents, jihad, in its original form, could only be sanctioned by the caliph, the legitimate spiritual and political leader of the Muslim nation. As the Islamic conquest of Arabia gathered force in the seventh century CE, jihad became a tool of statecraft that could be wielded by the caliph when geostrategic circumstances warranted the defense, or favored the expansion, of Muslim territory. It was a theologically-grounded rallying cry for Muslims to take up arms for their nation, and thus represents the convergence of the political and religious in Islam.
The fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I signaled the collapse of the caliphate, and triggered the emergence of three competing perspectives on jihad. One faction rejected the doctrine all together while another ignored it, but they both accepted the basic tenets of international law. The third faction, to be known as jihadists, reshaped its doctrines, and waged wars and conflicts in its name.
It is known that Saudi Arabia is participating in the funding. These are people that basically want to grow economically, but they can't because they ran into the interests of the existing oligarchic elites who rule the country and Western corporation. So by funding the insurgency, they're pushing towards a regime change, towards a new system whereby they will be in control. However, the three main divisions of the jihadist enterprise however include the Sunni Wahabis, the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, and the Shiia Khomeinis.
Emanating from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran, respectively, these groups can be distinguished in several ways, but they do share a common, long-term goal: expansion of the dar el Islam (house of Islam) into the dar el harb (house of war). Of course, the dar el harb consists of all territories that fall outside the realm of fundamentalist rule, and the “kuffar” (infidels) who inhabit them are ultimately viewed as enemies. People in Saudi Arabia that are participating in the funding, basically want to grow economically, but they can't because they ran into the interests of the existing oligarchic elites who rule the country and Western corporation. So by funding the insurgency, they're pushing towards a regime change, towards a new system whereby they will be in control.
Elsewhere, the jihadists believe that their interpretation of Islam is the only true one and thus see territorial expansion and conversion of infidels not as conquest, but liberation.The trouble with stopping suicide bombers, is that 80 percent of their ideological indoctrination can occur under the common legal protections of Western governments. Religious freedom and free speech rights that facilitate proselytizing are bedrock principles in domestic and international law.
Various tactics have been proposed including : empowering moderate Muslims; adapting legal systems to deal more effectively with suspected and captured terrorists; and educating the public about the threat posed by jihadism. However since Islamists measure victory by the perpetuation of their ideology to new recruits, non-intervention is a bad idea. And even supporting moderates exemplified by my comment about the Muslim Brotherhood yesterday, because instead of democracy many Muslim societies, at least in the short-run, would vote fundamentalists into power if given the chance. In fact Muslim Brotherhood invented ‘political jihad,’ which means using democracy to come to power so that they can destroy democracy.
Where Europe suffered from the triumphs of two authoritarian ideologies—Communism and fascism. In the Middle East, it was Arab nationalism and Islamism which have taken ideological hegemony and at times political power much more thoroughly.
Arab country plus Iran and the Palestinians has long been led by dictatorships—Lebanon and Iraq are currently different. These leaders have failed to deliver on their promises but they have not fallen. This situation is at odds with trends in the rest of the world. The regimes have survived through a mix of techniques, including repression and corruption, the use of anti-Americanism and anti-Israel rhetoric, playing ethnic politics, and other methods. The main challengers to them have been radical Islamists who in a sense have the same basic world view. They simply want to substitute Islamism for Arab nationalism. Most recently then the liberals have emerged as a third, but the weakest, alternative.
The main obstacle to democracy is the strength of the regimes and of their Islamist opponents, the appeal of those ideologies and their control over so many institutions. Forces which in Europe were allies of democracy—like religion and nationalism—are on the opposite side in the Middle East. Social groupings that were in the vanguard of democratic demands in the West and other places in the Third World—intellectuals, students, trade unions, businesspeople, professionals—are often tied to the government or, even worse, are the bearers of the dominant ideologies.
People are surrounded by a society which reinforces its idea and keeps out those of democracy. There is still not a single important liberal party outside of Kuwait. Even in Egypt, the opposition to the government is largely controlled by radical Arab nationalists and the Muslim Brotherhood.
|
For example: 1. Every person of Muslim background is supposed to share a common Muslim culture, whatever his or her real culture of origin (Turk, Bosnian, Pakistani or Arab), which means that religion is seen as the main component of these cultures, a component that can be isolated and erected as a culture in itself? 2. This culture is attributed to everybody with a Muslim origin, whatever his or her religious practice or level of faith (that is, without any link to religiosity). In this sense, one could speak of'non-believing Muslims'? 3. This culture differentiates a `Muslim' from an `other', who, in the West, is defined as a member never of a religious community, but of a pseudo-ethnic group (`Français de souche', `white', `European'), reproducing patterns of colonial history? Who is Culture? P.2: A Possible Answer Updated: The War for Muslim Minds |
Everyone rightly frets about "intelligence failures," yet we hear nothing about "media failures." We should, the press is the people's intelligence service, when the media fails, is duped, tricked, used, played, or beguiled, more than just the media loses. Exploding the Bin-Laden Media Myths.  The most active branch of ‘al Qaeda’ today is al-Zarqawi in Iraq. Yet Ali al-Sistani (backed by Iran) is by many considered a new ‘Mahdi‘. The Ideological Background: Mahdi, Satan, and Jesus. Next :The Islamic Front in Asia
End December: The Islamic Front in Europe |
FOR UPDATES CONTINUE TO:
