Terrorism Cannot Be Separated From Religion But…..

In a recent video, a British journalist makes the valid point that many of the perpetrators of terrorism have not been devout Muslims - in fact they were religious novices. The Abdussalam brothers sold their bar before their murderous spree in Paris. Cherif Kouachi who attacked Charlie Hebdo drank and took Hashish. Tamerlan Tsarnaev one of the Boston bombers was a pot smoker. Many 9/11 attackers were far from devout and were found carousing in Las Vegas strip clubs. And so on. He goes on to say that, in light of this, we should not blame Islam for their terrorist activities.

This journalist is a clever person and we need to listen to him. Of course, as reasonably intelligent people ourselves, after we have listened to him and been underwhelmed by what he is trying to say, we should try to get to the bottom of the problem more seriously. In order to do so, we have to ask three inter-related questions:

1.    What is the common thread in all these terrorist activities?

2.    If this terrorism cited by Hassan has nothing to do with religion, why were all perpetrators only Muslims? Why did we not find any Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs or Jains amongst those who blew up the twin towers in New York or who perpetrated the Paris bombing or the Brussels or the other seven bombings in this year March alone or who burned Mumbai, killing hundreds?

3.    And finally, whom should we blame for these terrorist activities?

Let us start with the first question. The common thread is that all perpetrators were Muslims. That, and the fact that people from Islamic countries financed them.

In view of the above, it is pointless to keep repeating that religion has nothing to do with terrorism. Let us look the problem squarely in the face and admit that religion definitely has something to do with this spate of terrorism.

I do not understand the unwillingness to face the truth. Is it because we fear that if we say that terrorists have been motivated by Islam, it will offend other Muslims? This is an unfounded fear. In fact, when we overlook the religious factor in terrorism we do disservice to common sense. Moreover, we act patronisingly towards peace loving Muslims.

I belong to a Hindu family. When I hear that some Hindu leader has done or said something despicable in the name of 'protecting' Hinduism, my reaction is 'what an idiot' and ‘punish him forthwith’. It is not, 'Oh religion has nothing to do with what he said or did' or 'if you label him a Hindu and blame him, it reflects on me because my faith is being blamed'. I am sure that the reaction of most Muslims vis a vis these Muslim terrorists is the same.

This also answers the second question. There was no non-Muslim involved precisely because religion has something to answer for in these cases. Yes, there have been terrorists belonging to other faiths and terrorists who were atheists, too. In their own time they have blown themselves and/or killed thousands of others based on their faith-led belief. However, at this time we are focusing on the present cases shaking up the world.

If Islam is the common thread in these terrorist activities, is it reasonable to say that Islam is a terror - prone religion? The answer depends upon whom you ask. For me, if Islam was inherently terror - prone, there would not be just a handful of terrorists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide. An overwhelming majority of these are leading their lives peacefully with no thoughts of terrorism entering their minds. Are they not following Islam? Had Islam been inherently a religion of terrorism, it would have infected all of them too and made them terrorists. But it hasn't.

Yet, the terrorists also call themselves Muslims. The last words shouted by so many suicide bombers have been Allah hu Akbar!

How to reconcile the Islam of the peaceful billion with the Islam of the terrorist thousands? For this we have to seek the answer to the third question. Who is responsible?

I feel that four sets of Muslims and one group of non-Muslims are responsible:

1.  Fundamentalist preachers who propagate Islam selectively, emphasizing certain traditions, which arose in a different environment many centuries back. Their constant refrain is a saga of victim hood, emphasized & reinforced by the phrase, 'Islam is in danger'. Their primary discourse is of the Muslim and the ‘Other’.

Undercover investigations in what is being taught in some mosques have revealed horrific content. Just one example can be heard in the secret recordings in British mosques shown on Channel 4. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undercover_Mosque). Similar exposes have been made in other countries, too.

The abovementioned British journalist, for all his carefully cultivated image is himself guilty of this. He has tried to explain away his impassioned video calling non-Muslims akin to animals and espousing the moral superiority of fundamentalist Muslims (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcC1QFhJT4&feature=youtu.be) but his explanation reeks of sophistry and afterthought.

2.  Financiers of the terrorists in Saudi Arabia and other countries who have their own warped religious mindset. They combine dreams of a global Caliphate with a distorted sense of what will win them jannat.

3.  Political leaders who mix religion and politics and sway the gullible by espousing a hard line and continuously demanding various rights in the name of Islam.

4. Educators who teach a one sided version of Islam, emphasizing Jihad and extolling the heavenly rewards for those who kill themselves and others in the name of Islamic martyrdom. The change of the school curriculum in Pakistan by Zia ul Haq is an apt example of this.

5.  Political correctness amongst many of the world’s non-Muslim and Muslim leaders in politics and media, who keep denying that terrorism and religion are connected. They overlook the above four factors and forget that religion has much to answer for. This has always been the case – from the crusades to the holocaust to 9/11 and the Mumbai attack. It also includes the millions killed by Stalin and Mao, for make no mistake – Communists, too, follow a religion with their own holy book and their own idolization of Marx and Lenin.

The next and most important question is: What should be done to curb terrorism now?

The first is, obviously, to recognize that the above five sets of factors are the ones responsible for terrorism. We can add any others to the list who may have been excluded to these, too.

To ensure that the target is not misidentified, we should also keep in mind those who are not responsible for terrorism but are often wrongly blamed. This includes the vast majority of Muslims, who are victims twice over – once by the fear of being killed by terrorists like all the others and the second by the fear of being blamed for terrorism for no fault of theirs.

Despite what the terrorists keep repeating, another factor that cannot be blamed for terrorism is the culture of the West or of India or any other nation where ‘Islamic’ terrorism raises its ugly head. The terrorists’ own cultural mindset is responsible for their mindset. In fact, many such cultures have had a moderating influence on the hard core of the faith born in the deserts of Saudi Arabia. India, Indonesia and Malaysia have seen this moderation, at least till the recent upsurge of religious fanaticism.

Keeping the above in mind, the leaders of the world, including those in the Islamic world need to develop a holistic strategy to counter these factors. Some elements in this strategy would be:

·    Financial channels of the terrorists must be choked off and those financing terrorists should be publicly named and shamed: Perhaps work on this has already commenced.

·    Education curricula needs to be revised and all references to Jihad, martyrdom etc. in the name of religion should be removed from the children’s curriculum. So should all references to Kaffirs etc. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi’s advice on this is worth listening to. (https://www.facebook.com/javedahmadghamidi/videos/988843541159597/)

·    Those advocating violence and promoting the ghettoization of Muslims in foreign countries should be exposed and curbed. An example can be seen in this video, secretly filmed in Danish mosques. (http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7648/denmark-sharia)

·    Closer and more empathic mentoring of our young in matters religious and greater emphasis on family values.

·    Better employment opportunities and a sense of closer integration with the society would reduce the sense of marginalization. This would be more applicable to the developing countries. Terrorists in the west appear to be well-funded and hardly any of them were unemployed.

·    Involve more women in decision-making in society. Bangladesh is an apt example. Though it is poor and a predominantly Muslim state, few Bangladeshis become terrorists. One major reason is that women have more say there and they drive the change.

A relevant question to be asked at this stage is, “Can Islam be reformed?”

There have been calls to ‘reform Islam’ from both Muslim and non-Muslim thinkers. While they are well-meaning, I feel that, given the ‘every-word-is-literally-true’ nature of the fundamental belief, this is a self-defeating aim. Instead of efforts to ‘reform Islam’ what is required is to reform the teaching of Islam. Let me elaborate.

Imagine you are lost and meet a few people at a crossroads. You ask them for directions. Each advises you to take a different path. They show you their maps. Each has a map that looks like all others but has a different path highlighted. How do you decide which path to take?

The same applies in the case of Islam. The map is the same but different Imams point to specific path they have highlighted in their own map. All paths derive their validation from the original map itself, which, as per fundamental belief, cannot be changed in any manner. However, each Muslim has a choice regarding which path he or she wants to follow on this map.

This point brings to mind the British journalist’s video demonstrating that all terrorists have been novice Islamists. It is such people that need the most appropriate guidance. When wrong guides get to them first, it does not matter whether they are novices or in-depth Muslims. Their bombs kill all with the same violence.

We just have to curb those who direct Muslims towards paths that lead to violence. There are paths in Islam leading towards peace and harmony, too and many millions are already following these. Those guides, who have highlighted these paths, must be encouraged.

In reference to peaceful beliefs, Cyrus the Great’s declaration of Human Rights is worth reading, especially in light of the transformation his Iran has seen in recent years under Islamic influence. If all Muslim religious, academic and political leaders worldwide espouse these, we will not see Islam being used as a crutch for terrorism any more. These are highly recommended for other world leaders, too, of course.

The Declaration of Human Rights by Cyrus the Great:

Now that I put the crown of kingdom of Iran, Babylon, and the nations of the four directions on the head with the help of (Ahura) Mazda, I announce that I will respect the traditions, customs and religions of the nations of my empire and never let any of my governors and subordinates look down on or insult them until I am alive. From now on, till (Ahura) Mazda grants me the kingdom favor, I will impose my monarchy on no nation. Each is free to accept it , and if any one of them rejects it , I never resolve on war to reign. Until I am the king of Iran, Babylon, and the nations of the four directions, I will never let anyone oppress any others, and if it occurs, I will take his or her right back and penalize the oppressor. And until I am the monarch, I will never let anyone take possession of movable and landed properties of the others by force or without compensation. Until I am alive, I will prevent unpaid, forced labor. To day, I announce that everyone is free to choose a religion. People are free to live in all regions and take up a job provided that they never violate other's rights. No one could be penalized for his or her relatives' faults.

Who should take the initiative?

Amongst Muslims themselves there are a very large number of thinkers who would like to help in this. Our own Dr. Abdul Kalam was one such. Sadly, like the late Asghar Ali Engineer, he is no more.  However, there are a large number of others like Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, Tufail Latif, Maajid Nawaz, Javed Akhtar, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, Daud Sharifa, Shaista Amber, Zeenat Shaukat Ali, Syeda Saiyidain Hameed, Uzma Naheed  etc. who are already working in this direction. These names are just off the cuff. There are millions more like them worldwide who can help.

Then there are the non-Muslim political, religious and social leaders who must also take the initiative. The first thing they need to do is to stop their followers from reacting to every incendiary, stupid or mischievous comment made by any Muslim leader. This only gives the controversial comment more publicity and promotes disharmony. Next, they need to support those on Islam’s crossroads who point towards the path of peace. Finally, most importantly, they have to moderate the conduct of their own people so that anti-Muslim actions and rhetoric are curbed and the true spirit of peaceful coexistence can prevail.

There is so much more that can be done to curb terrorism if blinders are lifted and on-the-ground action replaces mere words. Real change will not come only with increased security measures. It will come when we succeed in remembering that all of us – Muslims and others - are human beings first and everything else second. This will then guide us to follow the path of sanity and balance highlighted on our maps rather than be befuddled by the paths advocated by the vicious.

Kishore Asthana

asthana1@yahoo.com