Since the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington D.C., relations between the United States, its citizens, and the various countries that compose the majority of the Muslim speaking world have been relentlessly on the forefront. It is true to say that almost all of the known terrorists on that day were acting under the auspicious of Al-Qaeda, a multinational and mobile terrorist group that acts out of various locations throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa. It is also true to say that a majority of those Al-Qaeda operatives were in fact Middle Eastern, Arab and/or Muslim.
Thus, one does not have to be a rocket scientist to sense and measure a pretty sizable divide between the United States and the Muslim world ever since the attacks. Not only have both sides become more incensed and alienated from one another, but both sides have become more militant, angry, and less open to compromise. The divide between the United States and the Middle-Eastern Muslim world (It is important to be specific here—I'm leaving out the sizable portion of Muslims throughout Africa and in Indonesia, the country with the most Muslims in the world) transcends vastly different societal norms and rules to differing views on the role of religion and the role of the State. Below, I offer a brief overview of what has gotten us to this point, along with a description of the divide between these very different societies.
Why Terrorism, Why Now, Why Us?
Related Articles
| Middle Eastern Colonization & Spheres of Influence |
Samplings from several terrorist acts carried out by radicalized (the italics explained shortly) Muslims towards the Western world have certain parallels in regard to their motive and what they hoped to achieve. To begin, these self-described "Muslims," acting in defense of their God (Allah) through waging a holy war (Jihad) are only using the Muslim name and the religion of Islam to mask basic human feelings—feelings of abandonment, anger, humiliation, and jealousy. The reason for the terrorist attacks directed towards the likes of the United States and the United Kingdom (among other western nations) has been our messy and controversial history in the Middle East. Great Britain and France have for centuries meddled in the affairs of then-sovereign nations. Their overbearing influence converted stable, modernized societies grounded in scientific and educational prowess into crumbling empires bowing to revived feelings of nationalism. The Ottoman Empire crumbled at the conclusion of World War I, and countries including Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel (then the Mandate of Palestine; owned by the U.K.) were either outright colonial possessions or were indirectly controlled by foreign powers. Even with independence, these newly created states (sovereign again) were ran by corrupt and inefficient despots with either ties to the West (propped up for the sake of stability and security) or to the rise of radicalized Islam. These dictators funneled the wealth created from abundant natural resources (OIL) into their own coffers, leaving society underdeveloped and poor.
Branded with a troubling and humiliating history, living in pure squalor and limited opportunity, and no way of expressing anger and dismay at present conditions, it is no surprise that these young Muslims are attracted to militant Islam and terrorism. So to label Islam as a militant religion, naturally prone to violence and at odds with the development of democracy is just plain wrong.
I italicized "radicalized" because of its unique socio-political significance. Radicalized or fundamentalist Islam breaks away from the core tenets of mainstream Islam, that, over 1.5 billion people around the world follow. I am unable to delve deeper, given my anemic knowledge of Islam and its history, but any individual could do some basic research. I have learned a good deal on this subject from one of Fareed Zakaria's bestselling novels The Future Of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy At Home And Abroad.
We're Not Helping Ourselves Out
One of the occupational hazards of a rich, developed democracy like the one found in the United States is hordes of individuals who know little about the issues and the democratic process. American behavior towards Muslims has been all-around negative, disrespectful, and counter intuitive to any efforts of improving U.S.-Muslim relations. Americans have mirrored our government's attitude and policy towards Muslims in general. This is no short a truth than worsening untrue accusations coming from Congress. It turns out, what really got me motivated to write this post was a story that I first watched on CNN about a month ago. The story can be found in the video to the right.
Muslim Cab Driver: Passenger Assaulted Me
Americans unapologetically lump together over 1.5 billion Muslims and, without hesitation, label each and every one of them as no good terrorists. Now, Americans in general cannot be completely blamed per say American media and culture, at the behest of the Bush Administration, has latched on to the stereotypical ideal of radicalized Islam. Just think how many times you've seen Muslims portrayed in seemingly alien costume, equipped with a rocket launcher and a propensity for ill-will. In reality, most Muslims in the United States are like Mohammad Salim—honest individuals who work hard to provide a rewarding life for both themselves and their family. A sizable portion of the American Muslim community are urban, middle class individuals who believe in the American Dream; it's prospects, it's goals, and what it takes to achieve this aspiration.
Islam & Democracy: Is Marriage Possible?
One of the most controversial arguments in international politics and developmental democratic thought is the likelihood of Islamic countries transitioning to democracy. By taking a survey of the Middle East, you can come to the conclusion that there isn't much of a chance for democracy to sprout. Yet, under the tough and seemingly impenetrable vanguard various governments in the Middle East display, the indications of democracy have been developing for some time. For instance, take Iran. It's an "Islamic Republic," whose name is along the lines of the former communist states' titles of "democratic republic," which in essence means nothing. Once you get over the fact that it's governed by a group of supremely (no pun intended) bearded clerics and a clueless president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, you see an unusually vibrant and responsive society. Iranian society is filled with young, liberal, intellectuals who yearn to do something more with their life than study thousands-of-years-old scripture in crowded Tehran basements. In addition, they are looking to modernize Iran further by
reforming and democratizing its political system. Looking at Islamic democratic countries, take Indonesia. Most people are unaware but, as stated above, more Muslims call Indonesia home than any other country in the world. It is remarkable to think how Muslims compose a majority of the country's population, yet Indonesia enjoys a bustling and market-friendly capital in Jakarta, and a responsive democratic system after the Suharto regime.
Stepping Stones From Present Onwards
Like in previous entries, I ask once again what America can do, both as a society and a country to lessen the discord between the United States and the Muslim world.
Islam & Democracy: Is Marriage Possible?
One of the most controversial arguments in international politics and developmental democratic thought is the likelihood of Islamic countries transitioning to democracy. By taking a survey of the Middle East, you can come to the conclusion that there isn't much of a chance for democracy to sprout. Yet, under the tough and seemingly impenetrable vanguard various governments in the Middle East display, the indications of democracy have been developing for some time. For instance, take Iran. It's an "Islamic Republic," whose name is along the lines of the former communist states' titles of "democratic republic," which in essence means nothing. Once you get over the fact that it's governed by a group of supremely (no pun intended) bearded clerics and a clueless president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, you see an unusually vibrant and responsive society. Iranian society is filled with young, liberal, intellectuals who yearn to do something more with their life than study thousands-of-years-old scripture in crowded Tehran basements. In addition, they are looking to modernize Iran further by
| A pro-democracy rally in Tehran |
Stepping Stones From Present Onwards
Like in previous entries, I ask once again what America can do, both as a society and a country to lessen the discord between the United States and the Muslim world.
- Learn About Other People/Cultures — the majority of anger, hate, and discrimination is created by a lack of knowledge and ignorance on the part of the offender. It is simply too easy for Americans to lump all Muslims into the extremist/militarist Islam boat before any one of them has anything to say about it. The easiest solution is to just plain read books, amass more knowledge. If only a majority of Americans improve a bit on our elementary knowledge of Islam and its followers, that would cut down significantly on the controversy and split between Americans and Muslims. If you're a more hands on person, why not just visit a local mosque or spiritual center by your home. The safest and easiest thing to do is to pose questions, seek answers, and seek clarification.
- Foster Democratization & State-building — OK, so the supposed nation building efforts in Iraq and then Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11 hasn't really worked out on the part of the United States. Just Vietnam all over again. For one thing, our efforts have only worsened a power vacuum, making it easier for extremist elements around the Middle East to set up camp and maintain a following. Instead of trying to shove democracy and institutions down other countries' throats (who either aren't ready for it, need more time, or need to create institutions or structures of their own) using military means, America has forgotten our former strengths—so called "soft power." The term refers to a country's diplomatic and coercive ability to persuade other countries to sign on to a treaty, organization, agreement, etc. Instead of inadvertently propping up undemocratic governments through aid money, America can use this money to invest in civilian and good-will organizations. Perhaps something along the lines of the Peace Corps, created by President Kennedy in the 1960's. America can fund a vast array of nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) who could improve Middle Eastern society from the bottom up, instead of forcing change from the top down. By taking the attention off of what the United States doesn't like about these governments—human rights abuses, corruption, what-have-you—this will allow for a greater sense of cooperation and potential compromise. Uniting on an issue both sides care about is a possibility through the use of "soft power" and other unconventional foreign policy choices.
- Just Stay Home: Isolationism — Summarizing the libertarian Ron Paul's foreign policy agenda in one sentence, the United States can just "stay home." Let the Middle East be. Become isolationist. Whether transforming the United States into an isolationist power in such an economically and militarily interconnected world (Just think NATO) coupled with the immense responsibility that the international system places upon America is really possible, I'll leave that to you. To me, it's silly trying to apply an early 20th century American foreign policy directive to a 21st century environment. And if you thought nothing bad happens to you and the world if you remain isolationist just look at World War I. War and pure devastation.
