|
|
 |
 |
|
 | | Islam and Clash of Civilizations |
|
|
| By Tariel Hasanzadeh |
|
Fallout still fills the air following the attack on the World Trade Center last September. Moreover, many of the events facing the world today can only be explained in the context of the larger perspective of before and after. The term terrorist and Muslim are considered by many in the West to be one in the same. Such xenophobia over-simplification can easily set the stage for the dividing the world into two distant camps. The popular media and forces of political expediency, especially some identity seeking leaders, drive this unfortunate oversimplification with made for media rhetoric. Anyone who does not take the official story "hook-line and sinker" can readily be deemed a supporter of terrorism. Regardless, taken together with the clash of civilizations that begin with the close of the cold war, it now appears certain that the focus is redirected to the differences in the defining of opposite camps.
Reinforced by the concerted attack on Afghanistan, comes a discourse where both Muslim and non-Muslim alike are forced into defining their position within the political reality of the world today. Whatever claim to cultural ties and the political and economic reality in which they must survive is placed on the back burner. However, Islam, like other civilizations is a more complex concept than simply packaging it to suit specific and transitional needs of oil interests or the military industrial complex.
Ordinary Moslems interpret the actions of international anti-Taliban coalition as a war of "creeds" against the followers of Islam. Religious beliefs and the statements of their respective governments are not always one in the same. Governments have stood, with few exceptions, in supporting the struggle against international terrorism. The Moslem Leadership never went as far to officially stand behind the call to action by Usama Bin Laden in starting a Holy war against "Crusaders and Jews". Take for example the words of Amr Mosah, the General Secretary of the League of the Arab States, who said that Bin Laden "could not talk on the behalf followers of Islam nor Arabs".
Nevertheless, Islam and extremism are associated with terrorism by the majority in the Western mindset and considered to be one in the same. This conclusion blindly overlooks many examples of tolerance among followers of Islam and blatant displays of intolerance in many other religion groups and even within sects within larger mainstream religious groups.
People who claim to follow Islam are as essentially different from one another as are any other followers of a religion belief. This is true not only in terms of the larger indicators such as language, customs, and local traditions, but also in terms of local beliefs and traditions that vary substantially from region to region and within relatively closed groups and communities.
Frederick Denny, a academic researcher noted - "Moslems share at least two cultural spheres. One is the local culture of their native country, ethnic environment which is relatively inherent to a given place and time and other spheres that are accepted as being part of the collective belonging to Islam with all the cultural attributes".
Muslims debate with one another and have very different views on human rights, gender, political standings, and views of economic development - just as any other group (political or religious). One can find many opposing examples in modern history, when careless, unreasoned attempts are made "to push" Islam behind in favor of realization of any modernized project or assignment. This was always brought to split of society, so called "backup reaction". The most vivid example is Afghanistan, where during the government of left procommunist forces an attempt "to forbid" religion took place. Few are able or willing to take the time to address the underlining factors of cultural and political differences that are too easily manifested in religious differences.
Religious differences were considered as one in the same with political differences in the territory outside of the control of the Northern Alliance. It is necessary to dig deep into the root causes of conflict between societies and religious groups.
ISLAM IMPACTS THE WORLD'S GEOPOLITICS
By Drs. Vakhtang Maisaia, Mamuka Komakhia, Centre for Strategic Research and Development of Georgia, Tbilisi & Dr. Robert Olsen, Professor of History at the University of Kentucky, Lexington. Islam is the religion belonging to several billion people and it has become a very popular vehicle for manipulation by outside and internal elements for short-term economic and political gains. A Muslim is one
who has submitted to God's will or one who follows the religion of Islam based on birth or conversion. Nevertheless, it is often necessary to address the ramifications of the varying types of "purified Islam" as a standpoint dependency before taking any proverbial leaps of faith or given credence fully to policy decision or a specific political orientation.Truth vs. RealityDistinguishing the true realm from a hypothetical image and defining what is good or bad is a call that is most often in the eye of the beholder. Paradigms that reflect the old security policy of the cold war are constantly shifting and have not been able to effectively adapt to the new reality or to supply appropriate answers to new challenges. Nevertheless, few can now doubt influence over the minds of the society transmitting this process into political form. When one deems to describe Islam as a political phenomenon one articulates one's idea into the terms "Fundamentalism" and "Islamism". Although the religious and cultural variety within Islam also provides fundamentalism with its special character, some definitional asymmetries should be perceived within larger operational frameworks. In having said this, coming to terms with the relationship between Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism, there is a narrow path for the country of Georgia, especially within the regional context of anti-terrorism that is often based on weapons procurement and economic interests that are not in keeping with public interests. Chechens in their struggle against the Russian Federation are readily labeled by many as fundamentalist whereas another operational framework would readily classify them as freedom fighters in a struggle of self-determination.Regardless of polemics, the problem of a just cause versus blind followers are frequently viewed from the perspectives how the menace of Islamic Fundamentalism could shadow regional economical and social development. The events of recent years confirm the levels of difficulty in comparing policy options and other externalities and political bundles. Whether the Pope is the chief or that it is magnificent Sultans that depose the kings of Georgia - all is but sophisticated fabrication for political expediency.Post September 11Regional problems were complicated further by the events of September 11, 2001. After the reactive attacks on terrorist sites and the alleged destruction of the Taliban and AI-Qaeda network in Afghanistan and in Central Asia, the focus on the war on international terrorism moved towards the Caucasus region. As for Georgia, the presence of Chechen fighters and refugees in the Pankisi region of West Georgia continues to be a thorn in the side of Russian foreign policy and provides a constant point of conflict. Moreover, it is thought by many analysts to provide a convent front for the introduction of US Special Forces to train the Georgian army in anti-terrorist tactics. Many Georgian watches still question the alleged facts of it being a terrorist haven and feel it is a flimsy disguise for politically motivated intervention.UN and US AmbassadorRichard Miles, the recently confirmed US Ambassador to Georgia recently spoke to a UN organized conference in Tbilisi on July 9, 2002. He confirmed the threat of terrorism to Georgia and the world and confirmed the need for taking the UN terrorism conventions to the next stage in bringing together a cross section of interests in facing the issue head-on. Regardless of the final analysis of what is the actual situation on the ground in Georgia, it is clear that Intelligence services on both sides are quite active in providing the justification for policy shifts made by their decision-makers in larger end games. In the beginning the United States appeared to have the support of nearly every country in the war on terrorism but the full-fledged support given the US appears to softening in light of contradictions to domestic problems and documented military blunders in Afghanistan. The real policy motivation is closely connected whether the events would somehow impact oil and gas pipelines that were planned from Baku via Tbilisi to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan. This project has been talked about and debated for sometime but now the conditions forced the players to pull together to make it a reality and diminishing Russian's and Iran's regional hegemony at the same time. Despite setbacks and the revitalization of Russia as a regional player, it now is clear that the project is going to move forward as a result of political and economic expediency meeting because of international terrorism. Iran is likely the biggest loser in countering the energy needs and policy decisions of Russia, Israel and the United States.Politics and TerrorismThe American led war on terrorism was a great motivation for the Russians to rethink their participation and key role in regional energy projects. Major policy decisions in the energy section were evaluated in the fallout of September 11 for Moscow. The West wants to be less dependent on the oil resources of Saudi Arabia and look more and more on supplies flowing from the Caspian basin and from a Saddam-less Iraq. This in turn will strengthen US relations with Turkey and close allies (Israel, Azerbaijan and Georgia), thus keeping the Russian Federation in a cooperative position.Iran is consider as the big loser in the game of geopolitical space over the critical issue of the Caspian Sea and regional energy pipelines. Turkey and regional allies such as Georgia and Azerbaijan are the ultimate winners in positioning themselves between the conflicting interests of East and West. Moreover, Tehran's non-cooperative stance on "America's war against terrorism" will not help matters in the final analysis.References and Endnote1) Adapted from "Role of Modern Islam in the World Geopolitics on Cases of Regional Politics, Dr. Vakhtang Maisaia, (Centre for Strategic Research and Development of Georgia) and Dr. Manuka Kimakhia, Turkish - Russian Relations and South Caucasus, No. 15, April 2002 supported by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Foundation.2) Robert Olsen, Turkey-Iran Relations, 2002: The Caspian, Azerbaijan and the Kurds, Middle East Policy, (2002), 111-129.
|
|
|
|
|
