|
Statesman - November 15, 2007
Rhetoric undermines the war on terror
Dr. Parvez Ahmed
Given their divergent views from abortion to same-sex unions, Christian televangelist Pat Robertson's endorsement of Republican Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani makes them an odd couple. Their alliance is the result of a convergence of their interest in fighting 'Islamic terrorism.' This echoes Giuliani's longstanding description of the war on terror as a war on 'radical Islamic fascism.'
Giuliani and Robertson are not alone in their belligerent viewpoints. Christian activist Gary Bauer characterizes the fight against 'radical Islam' as a major 'family value' that tops his new evangelical agenda. Charles Colson of the Prison Fellowship describes 'Islamofascism' as the 'long war' while James Dobson of Focus on Family exhorts his fellow faithful to 'wake up' against 'militant Islam.'
The point of emphasis for them is on Islam, not terror. Thus, exempt from their 'war on terror' are groups like the Lord's Resistance Army of Uganda, which commits terrorism in the name of Christianity and Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, a Hindu-Marxist group, which to-date remains one of the largest purveyors of suicide bombings.
The conflating of Islam with terrorism exploits the extant fear and ignorance of Islam. Nearly 4 in 10 Americans admit being prejudiced against Muslims and seventy percent say that Islam has nothing in common with their faith.
Pat Robertson is the latest in a long line of Team Rudy fans that are distinguished by their disdain for Muslims. New York Congressman Peter King, an advisor to Giuliani, bitterly complains 'unfortunately we have too many mosques in this country.' Another advisor Daniel Pipes questions the wisdom of allowing American Muslims to vote. In his hostility towards Islam and Muslims, Robertson outshines them all. In the past, Robertson has railed against many groups but he has saved his harshest invectives for Muslims. He has called Muslims 'satanic,' claimed the Quran is 'fraudulent' and said Islam is 'a monumental scam.' Robertson also called the Prophet Muhammad 'an absolute wild-eyed fanatic, a robber and a brigand...a killer.'
Giuliani has exhorted other presidential candidates to adopt his views in the war on terror. The Democrats have resisted but other Republican candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul, have obliged. Mitt Romney went a step further and ran television advertisements citing 'jihadism' as 'this century's nightmare.'
Besides the sheer naiveté of such views a more fundamental question is - what do Arabic words like 'jihad' or 'Islam' mean when combined with English suffixes like '-ist' or '-ism'?
Muslims understand 'Islam' and 'jihad' to mean 'peace' and 'striving' respectively. But words like 'Islam-ist,' 'Islam-ism,' 'jihad-ist' or 'jihad-ism' lack any such uniform definition leading many Muslims to view such juxtapositions as the rhetorical equivalent of Islam.
It is thus not coincidental that today nearly 8 in 10 Muslims worldwide perceive the war on terror to be a war against their faith of Islam. Such perceptions, by most expert accounts, cannot make America safe.
Ironically, those promoting the use of 'Islamic terrorism' side with terrorists if it suits their agenda. They remain silent while the US military permits PKK, a Kurdish terrorist organization, to keep safe harbor in Northern Iraq from where they launch terror attacks against Turkey. They find no double standards in Bush administration's tacit support of Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, a State Department designated terrorist group, which conducts terror attacks against Iran from their bases in Iraq.
As the election season heats up the politicization of the 'war on terror' will unfortunately intensify. In this new political game, Islam will be made a scapegoat to rally voter's thorough evoking fear and paranoia. Muslims will be divided into those who are 'with us' (good Muslims) and those who are 'against us' (bad Muslims). The 'good Muslims' no matter how undemocratic or oppressive will be touted as our 'friends' while the 'bad Muslims' even if popular and representative of their own people will be marginalized as 'fanatical enemies.'
American Muslims long for the day when their faith is no longer the object of such machinations by our political leaders and spurious religious interpretations by those who commit terrorism in the name of Islam. Speaking out against those who promote a clash between civilizations will be a value worth fighting for.
Ahmed is the chairman of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). He is also an associate professor at the University of North Florida in Jacksonville, Fla.
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/11/15/1116ahmed_edit.html
|
