|
The author points at this stage in his article, to a lack
of an accurate and objective view of modern history, especially the history of
European colonialism since the beginning of the 16th century.
“This state of “alienation’ is followed by a
powerful conviction that the Muslim world has become the ‘victim’ of
imperialism. [The terrorist] imagines that colonialism had simply targeted the
Household of Islam and has not touched other lands. It is as if partitions [of
lands or countries] occurred only in Muslim parts of the world, and nowhere
else. Most likely, the terrorist knows nothing about the atomic bombs that were
dropped on
Japan
, or the spread of opium in
China
, or the partition of
India
, or of the Soviet Union, and all of
Europe
. He certainly has no knowledge about the leveling of the German city of
Dresden
in WWII, or the killing of 300,000 people in
Nanking
[during the Japanese occupation of
China
.]”
“Such a lonely and alienated individual is ready to
take the next step, that of killing. So he engages in his murderous activities
based on the hope of a coming salvation. This [strong feeling] is coupled with a
firm belief in his own spiritual, moral, and intellectual superiority over a
corrupt, oppressive, and dissolute world. [However] this outlook reveals a wrong
reading of Islamic history as well as [of a sound] religious knowledge.
Furthermore, his warped view of reality transforms our man [who is suffering]
from a state of utter humiliation into a ‘superman.’ He dreams of the
possibility of changing the whole world, by upsetting its sinful values. And
this will be achieved when a small group succeeds in terrorising the enemy and
scaring [those within the Muslim community] that have gone astray. This lonely
person [believes] he is carrying the right message to mankind by his supreme
sacrifice that ends in mass killings. By resorting to terrorism, he does not
only change history by putting it on the right course, but points out the way
for the mujahideen to reach
Paradise
. Thus a suicide bomber leaves behind him an alien world, and [goes to a place
of bliss] that no eye has ever seen, nor ear has ever heard of, nor entered into
the mind of man. If this is the right answer [to the phenomenon of Islamic
terrorism,] what is then the solution?”
I have seldom
seen such a candid analysis for the inner mind of a would-be terrorist. And to
have that appear in print as well as in the web edition of a newspaper that is
read by a good many people throughout the Arab world is a hopeful occurrence.
The author’s words as quoted above need no further comments, except one, and a
very important point I would like to make. I trust that I have not misunderstood
him when he wrote, rather early in his article:
“These answers remain unconvincing. For example,
why don’t all angry Muslims, (numbering more than a billion,) engage in
killing [others?] Why don’t others as well, who number by the billions, and
who have gone through similar experiences (as Arabs and Muslims) throughout
their own history, don’t engage in acts of terrorism?!”
I read, and re-read his words in the original Arabic, and
could not avoid the strong feeling that our author implies that all Muslims
today are angry, one billion of them! Not only they are angry, but billions of
others are equally angry! He did not specify who the objects of the anger of
billions were, but one cannot escape the feeling that he was pointing to the
West. Specifically, he had in mind European colonialism that began in earnest
soon after the discovery of the
New World
, and reached its zenith during the 19th and early 20th
centuries. Indeed,
Britain
,
France
, the
Netherlands
, and
Spain
did colonize most of the Muslim world. Other civilizations rooted in their own
religious traditions, entered the European imperialist orbit. All that is now a
thing of the past. European colonialism, with the exception of the French
presence in
Algeria
, did not attempt to overwhelm the colonial lands with mass movements of Western
settlers. The French experiment in
Algeria
ended after a bitter war with the nationals, and all of the Europeans settlers
had to resettle in
France
.
In contrast with European colonialism, Arab-Islamic
conquests had in most cases, a certain finality about them and makes them unique
in the history of mankind. The very fact that historians, on the whole, seldom
mention this topic is noteworthy. In Arab historiography, their conquests in the
Middle East, in East Asia, in North Africa, and in
Europe
, are called “futuhat,” literally, openings! Indeed a strange
word to use, when it entailed a massive movement of Arab tribes, and their
settlement in the conquered lands, turning the native populations instantly into
“strangers” in their own homelands! In some parts of the conquered lands,
such as in
Persia
, almost the entire population, while retaining their language, adopted the
faith of their conquerors. In other areas such as
Egypt
,
Syria
, and
North Africa
, over the years, the majority of the native population gradually adopted Islam,
leaving some native Jewish and Christian communities still attached to their
faith, but no longer able to use their Hebrew and Aramaic. They all became
Arabized.
I would love to find just one Arab writer who would
acknowledge the fact that Arabs and Muslims did engage in imperialistic
ventures. But I am still waiting for that confession.
Earlier in my article, I mentioned Bernard Lewis’ book, “What
Went Wrong?” I could now answer the question he posed by saying that
Muslims are not yet reconciled to the fall of their last empire in 1918. Six
years later, a Muslim-born Turkish leader, Mustapha Kemal Ataturk abolished the
Caliphate, and caused the Muslim world to lose its “center of gravity.” Just
as the British, the French, the Dutch, the Spanish, and the Portuguese, have
adjusted to the end of their empires, so Muslims must realize that in our
globalized world where we have all become interdependent, all efforts for the
restoration of an Islamic Caliphate are nothing but utopian dreams.
In the meantime, I would like to mention two authors whose
books shed a great light on the impact of Arab-Islamic imperialism on the
conquered peoples. One is Bat Ye’or.
Her books offer some valuable information about the plight
of those nationals whose lands were overrun by the Arab-Islamic armies beginning
with the 7th century. I mention two of her works: “The Decline
of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude”
published in 1996 by Associated University Presses,
Cranbury
,
N.J.
08512
And “Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations
Collide” published by the same presses in 2002
The other author is V. S. Naipaul who wrote “Beyond
Belief: Islamic Excursions Among the Converted People.” (Published
by Random House, New York, in 1998.) Naipaul is a British author, born in
Trinidad of Indian immigrant ancestry, and has authored another book on Islam
entitled “Among the Believers.” The present work is its sequel. Here
is a very relevant quotation from Naipaul’s Prologue to his latest book:
“Islam is in its origin an Arab religion. Everyone not
an Arab who is a Muslim is a convert. Islam is not simply a matter of conscience
or private belief. It makes imperial demands. A convert’s worldview alters.
His holy places are in Arab lands; his sacred language is Arabic. His idea of
history alters. He rejects his own; he becomes, whether he likes it or not, a
part of the Arab story. The convert has to turn away from everything that is
his. The disturbance for societies is immense, and even after a thousand years
can remain unresolved; the turning away has to be done again and again. People
develop fantasies about who and what they are; and in the Islam of the converted
countries there is an element of neurosis and nihilism. These countries can be
easily set on the boil.”
Muslim intellectuals must face up to the fact that there
was such a thing as an Arab-Islamic imperialism, and that it was uniquely
different from other types of colonial regimes. Until that happens, there can be
no peaceful co-existence between Islam and the rest of the world.
Page 1 |
Page 2
|
