March 16, 2003
DRAWING THE BATTLE LINES:
Some moderate Islamic clerics take a new hard line against US (Geneive Abdo, 3/16/2003, Boston Globe)Mainstream Muslim clerics in the Middle East who had denounced Osama bin Laden are now urging followers to rise up against the United States if it attacks Iraq, in a sign that some Islamic moderates are finding common cause with extremists.At the Al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, the 1,000-year-old temple and theological guide for hundreds of millions of Sunni Muslims, a group of sheikhs called last week for Muslims around the world to declare a holy war against the United States.
''According to Islamic law, if the enemy steps on Muslims' land, jihad becomes a duty on every male and female Muslim,'' according to a statement issued by Al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy.
In Jordan, the leader of the Islamic Action Front, the country's largest and most powerful mainstream Muslim party, said last week that Muslim movements should take up arms to defend Iraq against American aggression.
''Under US occupation, no one will restrict their actions to peaceful means,'' said Sheikh Hamza Mansour, leader of the Front. ''Everyone will call for resistance by all the means they can muster.''
Islamic scholars say such statements may signal a shift toward a radical stance by clerics who traditionally have stressed moderation and nonviolence, and a Muslim public that has grown increasingly anti-American and that has participated in massive antiwar demonstrations in recent weeks from Cairo to Karachi, Pakistan, and to Jakarta, Indonesia. [...]
US officials and some world leaders have warned that a war against Iraq could increase terrorism. President Jacques Chirac of France has said that, in a war with Iraq, ''the first victors will be those who want a clash of civilizations, cultures, and religions.'' [...]
Islamic scholars in the United States who oppose calls for a religious struggle against America say the United States has succeeded where even bin Laden has failed: US policies in the Middle East have united a myriad of factions across the Muslim world to create the kind of umma, or community of believers, bin Laden has evoked.
One would hope it wouldn't come to a generalized war of Christendom (America) vs. Islam, but that's always been a possibility and remains up to the Muslim world If the umma is based on a totalitarian vision of Islam, that requires that states be governed religiously and that non-believers be treated as enemies, then a broader war is inevitable. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 16, 2003 6:45 AM
It is the worst kind of hypocrisy for these scholars to lambast the US when Hussein has killed more Muslims than anyone else around.
Where were they when he was gassing Kurds?
It does seem deranged, doesn't it?
Posted by: oj at March 16, 2003 8:21 AMNot at all.
Gassing the Kurds is merely an internal affair. Besides, when was the last time an Arab or Islamic despot was called on massacring (or oppressing) people living within the realm. Yawn.
The US will be hugely popular in the Arab world when it no longer supports Israel's right to defend itself and, like the other "peace-seeking" western countries, continues to look the other way while Saddam, and Iran, develop WMD.
Of course, it will be even more popular when it declares Sharia law.
Popularity, anyone?
It baffling to me that the Moslem/Arab world would feel the need to defend a man who has no qualms about attacking Moslems and Arabs (Iran and Kuwait).
Hussein has no feelings of brotherhood with these people unless it's in his best interests to do so. It that so hard to understand?
I'm on record more than once about the
clash of civilizations, so I won't repeat that.
I would like to point out that, setting religion
aside for a moment, the Arabs have a very
good practical reason for allying with the US
against Saddam (and others like him, such as
Khadaffy), or even standing up on their hind
legs and doing the job themselves: oil.
For the Arabs, the coming war (whether it comes
this week or in a much bigger way later), this
is indeed all about oil. It's the only resource
they have, and when it's gone they'll be on
their own, with either an economy and a
society created out of temporary oil wealth,
or they'll be back, materially, to their condition
in 1910.
So far, most of the oil has gone for toys and
weapons that the West laboriously destroys.
I have yet to see any Arab, Muslim or otherwise,
cotton onto this obvious fact, which is why
I believe the Clash of Civilizations is inevitable.
Bernard Lewis has argued that oil is the main problem for the Arab world, making it so governments don't have to tax their people and stifling the development of other economic sectors.
Posted by: oj at March 16, 2003 5:20 PMI once remarked to an Egyption-American friend of mine that the middle east is Africa with oil and Jews, and that's why we pay attention.
Posted by: David Cohen at March 16, 2003 5:56 PMAnd how did your friend react?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 16, 2003 9:07 PM