Sunday, May 13, 2007
Religion is the problem and the solution
By Tauqeer H Taqi
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=42450
Islamic fundamentalism cannot be explained as a reaction to American foreign policy or Third World poverty. I think no dialogue between civilisations will work unless it starts from the right base to stop this bloody puzzle game of unrest, fear and terror.
There is a spectre haunting the world, and it is no longer communism but the global resurgence of religion and its impact on world politics. It would seem that very few people want to believe that this global cultural shift is taking place; least of all, rather oddly, many Christians, since the most common reason given for the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre is a secular and a materialist one.
Many Christians in Britain have talked about being tough on terrorists and tough on the causes of terrorism? and by this they seem to mean overcoming the economic, social, and political inequalities, which are supposed to cause religious extremism or Islamic fundamentalism. But it was not because of the adverse affects of globalisation or the failure of American foreign policy that the World Trade Centre was destroyed and the Pentagon damaged in attacks which cost the lives of nearly 3,000 people ?roughly 5 per cent of the total number of casualties during the Vietnam War ?in the space of only one hour.
What is required is a better understanding of how culture and religion should appropriately be examined in international politics. The economic analysis many Christians have used to explain the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington does not fit the profile of the hijackers, nor the profile of Osama bin Laden. The hijackers were not alienated, or marginalised victims of globalisation, but Arabs who had benefited from globalisation and from their time in the west. What they have in common with the leaders, as well as the followers, of many Islamist movements, such as Sayyid Qutb, the radical Islamicist during Nasser抯 regime in Egypt, or Hassan al-Turabi in the Sudan, is that they rejected a western modernity many of them had experienced because they were educated there.
Islamic fundamentalism is not a result of alienation, social exclusion, or globalisation. It is a cultural and religious response to secular materialism. Since colonial occupation, the developing countries have been confronted with a dilemma: should they emulate the west in order to gain equality in power ?spurning their own culture ?or should they affirm their own cultural and religious traditions, but remain materially weak?
The dilemma of identity and development was resolved in the first years after in- dependence by emulating the west. The first generation of Third World elites that came to power in the late 1940s ?Nehru抯 India, Nasser抯 Egypt, Sukarno抯 Indonesia (and, going back to the 1920s, Ataturk抯 Turkey) ?espoused a similar 搈odernising mythology?inherited from the west. The application of this mythology has failed to produce political participation and a basic level of economic welfare throughout much of the developing world, particularly in the Middle East. This has led to the resurgence of religion, nationalism, and a proliferation of religious and ethno-national conflicts.
What is at issue in Pakistan is a battle of ideas and the struggle for cultural authenticity. More foreign aid and greater economic development, important though this is, will not eliminate the roots of religiously motivated terrorism, nor will it necessarily create the conditions for a more peaceful world. Economic development does not resolve the fundamental religious, cultural, or political differences between states or civilisations. Indeed, it may even exacerbate once weak states, or non-state groups within them, gain more power to wield in world politics.
The primary issue between the west and the Islamic world is the shift in world power since the sixteenth century. At its root is cultural and political resentment, which cannot be resolved by greater economic development because what is resented is the rise of the west and the gradual fall of Islam. Westerners tend to believe that if economic development takes place, then people in ?or from ?the Islamic world will become 搇ike us? and then there will be no more threats to global security. Thus, to some extent, the call for dealing with the alleged 搑oot causes?of terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism should be acknowledged for what it is ?a new form of liberal imperialism.
More foreign aid and an ?allegedly ?more equitable global economy will not change the opposition. The reason that Bin Laden has declared war on the United States and resorted to the most horrific terrorism seen so far in the modern world is not that he is concerned about Palestinians, or Chechens, or Kashmiri separatists fighting Russia and India. He is fighting the United States because it backs moderate Arab governments in the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia, but also Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco. This American stance is resented by Islamist groups who want to impose a purer, more demanding form of Islam as part of a global cultural shift.
How should we understand the impact of ideas, particularly religious ideas, in the social sciences, and how should we understand the relationship between religion and culture in international politics? This is the main theoretical issue. Is religion to be interpreted mainly as a body of ideas or doctrines, which would mean that Islamic fundamentalism should be regarded simply as a type of right-wing ideology?
If this kind of modern understanding is adopted, it is easy to see why religion is often seen as a mere epiphenomenon, a secondary symptom which hides ?allegedly ?more important economic, social, or technological forces in society. The impact of religion and culture in international politics is distorted when religion is invented by social theory as a set of privately held doctrines or beliefs in this way, and is applied to societies which have not yet made, or are struggling to make, or are even struggling not to make ?as part of the clash within civilisations ?this kind of social transition.
Taking religion and culture seriously means recognising that the cosmopolitan values of western liberalism, rooted in the European Enlightenment, may no longer provide an adequate basis for what is becoming a genuinely multicultural international society for the first time in history. Can the west and Islam live together, and if so, how? This will not be possible if the west simply expects Muslims to exchange the beliefs, practices, and traditions, which are constitutive of Islamic communities for those of western liberalism, which appears to be what many people expect in the west. Now it抯 time to find the reason within religion to stop this confrontation because there is a dangerous gap between the west and the Muslim world security.
Accessed 12/5/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reflections:
One would expect that with globalization comes the destruction of religion. After all, in the quest to follow the west, heritage and tradition are sacrificed. Religion is seen as an inconvenience imposed on members of the MTV generation. In the UK, only 10% of the population visit a place of worship (church, temple etc….) regularly. However, religion could also be seen as the oldest benefactor of religion. Different ideologies are spread to different parts of the globe and religion has no boundaries. Christianity could have followers in the USA and also in China, while Buddhism is practiced in both India and China. Religion is even making use of the technological advances that globalization to export their ideology. On the internet, there are online bible studies and several television stations broadcast Islamic prayer sessions. Therefore, religion experiences some benefits from globalization.
However globalization does have several negative impacts on religion. Globalization has led to the rise of religious insurgents and has provided the platform for terrorism to succeed. The article states that religious terrorists are not victims of globalization however many turn to terrorism because they feel that globalization is destroying their culture and detest the Western world for introducing it. The article further states that the insurgents have benefited from globalization. This is indeed true and is further evidence of the role globalization plays in terrorism. Globalization has made terrorists wealthy and gives them the money to carry out their plans. In addition, through technological advances, they now have the means to inflict mass destruction on countries far away. This can be seen in the case of the US September 11 attacks. With globalization, religion has now evolved into new form – extremism in the form of terrorism.
So what is the effect of this new breed of religion on politics? With the threat of terrorism, governments must now take action to protect its citizens from bomb threats and hijackings and other threats. One of the ways the government would do so would be to increase military strength. Governments would now want a task force that is prepared to handle any terror attack that may come. In addition, they would need a large team to track down and investigate any remote leads that may ultimately compromise national security. In addition governments must set legislation as to what to do with the terrorists if they are caught. This issue will be a controversial one. Many countries oppose the death penalty and governments must decide if they still want to follow their policy on the death sentence. In the case that the terrorists are from another country or found in another country, the government must decide what to do with the criminal, whether to handle the situation themselves or to leave it up to another country. This was evident in the case of the 2002 Bali bombings where the bombers were sentenced to death, a sentence that was celebrated by the Australians who had suffered many casualties although the Australians also oppose the death penalty. If the delicate situation is not handled carefully, there could be serious repercussions.
Other than religious terrorism, another effect of globalization would be the increase in religious parties in politics. Those who feel that the country is taking a more globalised route and squashing religious values may seek to regain those values by forming political parties and taking over the country. Currently there are many countries whose political parties are separated by religion. In Turkey, the parliament is mainly made up by the Islamic Justice and development party (AK) while the president is secular. Recently, the Islamic group has wanted a change in president to one who is a Muslim. The army who wants to continue Turkey’s tradition of having a secular president is objected to this. These two conflicting views have led to many rumours of coups and has led to political instability especially with the upcoming July elections. As a result of its mainly Islamic parliament and reputation, Turkey’s entry into the European Union has been blocked many times before. The article suggests that if the west and the islamic world do not find a way to coexist peacefully, the situation could become deadly.
In today’s society, globalization has an impact even on religion. Although this impact can be both positive and negative, the negative effects of religion on politics could be the rise of religious terrorism. Another impact would be the rise of religious political parties which could interfere in the governing of the country and its relations with other countries.
-joanne, political expert
Future Perfect; Political Expert
8:15 AM
