The United
States is “not perfect” and so it must have
committed mistakes in the past, remarked an American Muslim at a seminar in the
national capital on the state of Muslims residing in world’s oldest democracy.
He was asked to comment on the role played by the US in turning Islam,
otherwise a religion of love and compassion and cherishing ‘mohabbat’ more than
anything else, into today’s “Radical Islam” – something more identified as an instrument
of Jehad.
The question was not unfounded or based on simple conjectures.
To start with
the United States carried
out regime change in Iran
in 1953 which led to radicalization in the country.
History is witness that the CIA admitted in
later stage that American establishment had hired Iranians to pose as communists
and stage bombings to turn the country around politically.
Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser Zbigniew
Brzezinski told CNN earlier this year that the United States “organized and
supported” Osama Bin Ladan and other originators of Al Qaeda in the 1970s.
CIA director and Secretary of Defence Robert
Gates confirmed in his memoir that the U.S. backed the Mujahaeedin in the
1970s.
Thus, the
truth of the matter is the “biggest enemy” of the US ,
bin Laden had left Saudi Arabia
to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan
after Moscow ’s
invasion in 1979. As a consequence of this, by 1984-85, he was running a front
organization Maktab al-Khidamar – the MAK – which funneled money, arms and fighters
from the “outside world” into the Afghan war.
This is about the past. In the present time, the United States has had many faces before the
world about its relationship with Muslims both residing in America and
outside. In 2009, that is exactly 8 years after 9/11 disaster, the US president
Barack Obama said in Cairo, Egypt, “Let there be no doubt, Islam is a part of
America”.
The seminar was addressed by the American Muslims or Muslims from
other countries now settled in America .
As a section of skeptical audience put it, the effort was to “whitewash” the
American image – at least partly.
One panelist and a woman was born closer home, Mumbai and had
migrated with her parents at the age of 7.
She and other shared stories about American Muslims and other
Americans’ behaviour in the neighbourhood especially after the 9/11
Frankenstein’s monster-type disaster.
“Instead of encountering hostility from the wider
community, we found that half of the people at the mosque often are Americans
of other faiths who come to express support and solidarity,” said another.
These could be true. But for many Indians among the audience, the story was
almost similar as after such communal holocaust a section of people do try to
spread the message of sanity and compassion. Pluralism is also much cherished a
norm in India like the US over religious
divide or prejudice.
Now, coming back to Indian polity for a while, one does
have the cases of 1984 anti-Sikh riot and 2002 anti-Muslim mayhem of Gujarat on
the backdrop.
The political reality also is: in both the instances the
political impact has been immense. In 1985, Rajiv Gandhi stormed to power
inheriting the throne from his slain mother Indira Gandgi with record 400-plus
members in Lok Sabha; and the ‘2014 hero in Indian politics’ is Narendra Modi,
a chief protagonist as chief minister of polarized Gujarat
of 2002!
Let us revert back to the issue at hand, “Muslims in America ”. The
general refrain both from the panelists and the US
establishment is: the Muslim Americans are the most ethnically diverse faith
community in America .
For instance, we are told time and again in the media that American Muslims not
only help their country (that is the US )
through professions but also donate time and money to help America ’s
needy.
But how
does one really diagnose emergence of a fundamentalist Islam in the western
world, say unlike India ,
where the Muslims did not have to confront traditional rivals like Hindus?
Perhaps
in European perspective, the pragmatic approach to religion was ‘traditionalist
Islam’ and that offered Muslims a “stable and satisfying” life. Notably, this traditionalist
approach to Islam still rules the roost in remote Muslim countries such as Morocco and Yemen .
But with
the advent of 18th century and an assertive –western world-European-civilization,
perhaps the “traditionalist Islam” began to lose its hold. The European
expansion in the fag end of 18th century caused a decline in the
power and wealth of the Muslim world.
Muslims came
face to face with their poverty and what was also dished out by western
intellectuals especially as ‘cultural backwardness’.
In India
too, such thinking had dawned for quite sometime and thus many Hindus in India and Muslims in the west responded by
looking to Europe for “new ideas and methods”.
The Hindu society benefited by few
instances like it could do away with Sati system and also encourage girl-child
education and also education in English in general. But the traditionalist
virtues were eroded. This was also the case with the school of thought that
championed the cause of traditionalist Islam. Thus, in the west and partly in
the Arab world too, three faces of Islam came to the fore: the moderate or the
one allowing secularism, the reformism and the fundamentalism or radical Islam
championing Jehad and even terror.
Notwithstanding the American role in 1970s,
it is also a fact that the ‘fundamentalist’ face of Islam actually existed in
some parts since the seventh century. According to some historians, it gained
political legitimacy in some parts in the 1920s. Thus,
the 1970s and beyond led to the rise of ‘fundamentalism’. The experience
worldwide and also in America
was contrary to Muslim intellectuals appetite for ‘modernization and
secularism’, the Muslim masses have a greater tendency to absorb the ‘radical
Islam’. This also had resulted in the ironical twist in Indian history in the
context of Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s initial commitment for a Hindu-Muslim unity
and how he partitioned India .
The
general experience is the Muslim masses either in America or in Indian sub-continent
preferred to “preserve accustomed ways and radical face” as the instrument to
fend off European or Hindu influences and practices. In Iran , Akbar
Hashemi-Rafsanjani, speaker of the Iranian parliament, had stated famously what
is on every Muslim fundamentalist's mind: "Islam is important because it
is capable of defeating Western culture."
The argument would sell even in India when Muslims are given a call
to fight “majority Hindus or kafirs”. Similarly, such a call has come from Al
Qaeda in recent times.
But in the ultimate analysis, one is touched by the remarks of an
American panelist, who told the seminar rather emphatically: “What I love about
America
is that as Muslims and non-Muslims we at least agree that we remain united in
facing the problems and challenges together”. This could save America and we in India too, need to emulate this
simple test of life.
(ends)
No comments:
Post a Comment