by RAMZY BAROUD, 19 January, 2015.
It is still not about Islam, even if the media and
militants attacking western targets say
so. Actually, it never was. But it was important for many to conflate
politics with religion; partly because it is convenient and
self-validating.
First,
let’s be clear on some points. Islam has set in motion a system to
abolish slavery over 1,200 years before the slave trade reached its peak
in the western world.
“The
charities are to go to the poor, and the needy, and those who work to
collect them, and those whose hearts have been united, and to free the
slaves, and those in debt, and in the cause of God, and the traveler. A
duty from God, and God is Knowledgeable, Wise.” [Al-Koran. 9:60]
It
is unfortunate that such reminders would have to be regularly restated,
thanks to constant anti-Islam propaganda in many western countries. The
outlandish and often
barbaric behavior of the so-called Islamic State (IS) has given greater impetus to existing prejudices and propaganda.
“For
Muslim men and women, for believing men and women, for devout men and
women, for truthful men and women, for patient men and women, for humble
men and women, for charitable men and women, for fasting men and women,
for chaste men and women, and for men and women who remember God often –
for them has Allah prepared forgiveness and great reward.” [33:35]
Third, the
sanctity of life is paramount in Islam to
the extent that “…if any one slew a person (..) it would be as if he
slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he
saved the life of the whole people.” [
5:32]
Still,
this is not about Islam. This is about why Islam is the subject of this
discussion in the first place, when we should be addressing the real
roots of violence.
When
Islam was introduced to Arabia many centuries ago, it was, and in fact
remains, a revolutionary religion. It was and remains radical, certainly
the kind of radicalism that, if viewed objectively, would be considered
a real challenge to classism in society, to inequality in all of its
forms, and more importantly, to capitalism and its embedded
insatiability, greed and callousness.
To
avoid a rational discussion about real issues, many make non-issues the
crux of the debate. So Islam is discussed alongside IS, Nigerian tribal
and sectarian conflicts, Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation,
immigration issues in Europe and much more.
While much violence happens across the world in the name of Christianity, Judaism, even
Buddhism in Burma and Sri Lanka,
rarely do entire collectives get stigmatized by the media. Yet, all
Muslims are held directly or otherwise accountable by many, even if a
criminal who happened to be a Muslim went out on a violent rampage. Yes,
he may still be designated as a “lone wolf”, but one can be almost
certain that Muslims and Islam somehow become relevant to the media
debate afterwards.
Since
Francis Fukuyama declared the “End of History” in 1992 – reveling that
free markets and “liberal democracies” will reign supreme forever –
followed by Samuel Huntington’s supposed contrasting, but still equally
conceited, view of the “Clash of Civilizations and the need to “remake
the world order”, a whole new intellectual industry has embroiled many
in Washington, London and elsewhere. Once the Cold War had triumphantly
ended with an inflated sense of political validation, the Middle East
became the new playground for ideas about dominion and military
hardware.
Since then, it has been an
all-out war,
either instigated by or involving various western powers. It was a
protracted, multi-dimensional war: a destructive war on the ground, an
economic war (
blockades on the one hand and
globalization and
free market exploitation on the other), cultural invasion (that made
westernisation of society equivalent to modernity); topped with a
massive propaganda war targeting the Middle East’s leading religion:
Islam.
The war on Islam was
particularly vital, as it seemed to unify a large range of western
intellectuals, conservative, liberal, religious and secular alike. All
done for good reasons:
-
Islam is not just a religion, but a way of life. By demonizing Islam,
you demonize everything associated with it, including, of course,
Muslims.
–
The vilification of Islam which morphed into massive western-led
Islamophobia helped validate the actions of western governments, however
violent and abusive. The dehumanization of Muslims became an essential
weapon in war.
–
It was also strategic: hating Islam and all Muslims is a very flexible
tool that would make military intervention and economic sanctions
possible anywhere where the West has political and economic interests.
Hating Islam became a unifying rally-cry from advocates of sanctions on
Sudan to anti-immigrant neo-Nazi groups in Germany, and everywhere else.
The issue is no longer the violent means used to achieve political
domination and control of natural resources, but, magically, it all was
reduced to one single word: Islam; or, at best, Islam and something
else: freedom of expression, women rights, and so forth.
Thus, it was no surprise to see the likes of
Ian Black commenting in the Guardian,
hours after gunmen carried out a lethal attack in Paris against a
French Magazine on Wednesday, 7 January with the starting line: “Satire
and Islam do not sit well together…”
Not
a word on the French military and other forms of intervention in the
Middle East; its destructive role in Syria; its leadership role in the
war in Libya; its war in Mali, and so on. Not even a word on François
Holland’s recent statement about
being “ready” to bomb Libyan rebels, although it was made only few days earlier.
Sure,
the pornographic satire of Charlie Hebdo and its targeting of Prophet
Mohammed was mentioned, but little was said, by Black, or the many
others who were quick to link the subject to “7th century Islam”, to the
hideous wars and their horrible, pornographic manifestations of
torture, rape and other unspeakable acts; acts that victimized millions
of people; Muslim people. Instead, it about western art and Muslim
intolerance. The subtle line was: yes, indeed, it is a “clash of
civilizations”.
Did
any of these “intellectuals” pause to think that maybe, just maybe, the
violent responses to demeaning Islamic symbols reflect a real political
sentiment, say for example, a collective feeling of humiliation, hurt,
pain and racism that extend to every corner of the globe?
And
that it is natural that war which is constantly exported from the West
to the rest of the world, could ultimately be exported back to western
cities?
Is it not possible that Muslims are angered by something much more subtle and profound than Charlie Hebdo’s tasteless art?
Avoiding
the answer is likely to delay a serious attempt at finding a solution,
which must start with the end of western interventionism in the Middle
East.
Ramzy Baroud is
an internationally-syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author
of several books and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. He is
currently completing his PhD studies at the University of Exeter. His
latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story
(Pluto Press, London).
