Islam and the West: Who
is the Terrorist? (PART 2)
The
Western Dualism
The big question is: What
is the reality? While adamantly raising this question about
Jesus Christ, Roman ruler Pontess Pilot had ordered his
crucification. Perhaps today’s successors of the Roman
rulers have decided to crucify Muslims and Islam after
holding them responsible for terrorism.
It is difficult to define
terrorism and what constitutes it. This ambiguity is being
exploited by the powerful countries. A lot of hue and cry
was raised about ambiguity in the blasphemy law and the
German Chancellor chose to himself raise the issue during
his meetings with the Pakistani rulers. It is worth noting
that though nobody has so far been punished under this law,
a full-blown campaign against the law is on. Terrorism is
really a strange crime for which not only the individuals
but the whole nations and followers of a religion are being
targeted and victimised; deceitful and fraudulent methods
are employed to hijack and arrest the accused (which itself
is terrorism), and on the other hand there is no definition
for it under any law. Neither is it a crime under any
international law nor any punishment is prescribed for it (Shukre,
1991). According to the author of the most authentic book
on this subject, the definition of terrorism is not only
ambiguous but is non-existent, rather impossible (Lacguer,
1977, p 5). If there is any definition, it is highly
controversial because this is not a legal but a political
issue. The politically motivated definition is aimed at
condemning the accused more than defining the crime itself
so that despicable actions against the opponents could be
justified and the demands of the biased view and political
interests are fulfilled (Rubenstein, 1977).
This self-centred approach
teaches that terrorism which serves own interest should be
regarded as legitimate while the one which does not serve
this purpose is illegitimate and heinous crime. Today’s
liberation fighter is tomorrow’s terrorist and today’s
terrorist is tomorrow’s Prime Minister [e.g. Afghan
Mujahideen, Israeli Prime Minister Ben Gurian, Kenyan
President Jomo Kenyata]. If the terrorists are from amongst
own ranks, their acts and motives would be viewed with
sympathy and efforts are undertaken for the way out and
solution. The crime would be considered as of an individual
and the community would not be held responsible for it.
This would be the attitude when the terrorists are, for
instance, Americans. However, when terrorism goes against
own interests or the terrorists are political or
civilizational adversaries, they would be declared
formidable terrorists, liable to severe punishment. Their
culture, their religion and whole of their country all
would become culprits. This view is adopted when terrorists
are found to be from amongst the Muslims.
To achieve their
objectives, the powerful countries openly carry out
military, economic or political actions against whomever
they want and whenever, wherever they like. They target
whole of the countries, as America did to Iraq, Panama and
Haiti. They drop as many bombs they like, as Israel does in
Lebanon and shelled at PLO headquarters in Tunis and Iraqi
nuclear installations. American heavy bombardment on a
small Cambodian territory outclassed the bombardment during
the Second World War, US also bombed at the residential
areas of Tripoli and Ben Ghazi and the residence of Col.
Qaddafi. Using their agents in foreign lands, these
countries topple governments, as CIA did to Dr. Musadiq’s
government in Iran. They can organize homicidal attacks on
the heads of states and leaders and get them killed, as
they did to Chile’s elected Prime Minister, Alliande, Cuban
President Castro, Libyan President Qaddafi, Iranian Speaker
Behishti and Prime Minister Ba-Hunar, Lebanon’s Sheikh
Fazlullah, Saudi King Faisal and General Zia-ul-Haq of
Pakistan. They can force whole of the country, including
its women and children, to suffer from protracted hunger
and disease, as they are doing in Iraq.
Since the authority of
defining terrorism also lies with these powerful countries,
they not only manage to keep their actions out of the
definition of terrorism despite their being acts of overt
state terrorism, they consider them to have been taken in
the name of justice and fair-play and for the welfare of
the humanity. On the other hand, acts of hijacking,
occasional bomb blasts and killings done by the oppressed,
who have no other means to register their protest and draw
world’s attention to atrocities perpetrated upon them, are
zealously projected as the worst forms of terrorism and all
efforts are made to rally world support in favour of such a
biased propaganda. Therefore, large scale massacre and
arson by hundred of thousands of Indian forces in Kashmir,
by Russian army in Chechnya, by Israeli forces in Beirut
are considered normal and legitimate. Terrorists are
Kashmiris, Palestinians, Chechens, and Pakistan if it wants
to support the oppressed Kashmiris in their right cause of
attaining the right promised to them by the world
community.
Muslims Face
Discrimination and Cruelty in the West
If the purpose is to find
out reality, instead of being captives to illusion, then it
is necessary to ascertain as to which extent the lives and
properties, religion and places of worship of Muslims
living in these very Western countries are safe.
The use of force against
and desecration of places of worship and graveyards should
be declared as worst form of terrorism. There have been
countless incidents of attacks on the mosques and
graveyards and throwing of pork in Britain, Germany and
other countries of Europe. But here again, the US tops them
all. In Yoba town, 150 miles away from San Francisco in
California, a beautiful mosque was built in a period of
three years at a cost of one million dollars. It took two
whole years in obtaining mere permission for its
construction. Soon after its completion, inflammable
chemicals were sprayed on it on September 01, 1994, and the
whole mosque was burnt and reduced to ashes overnight.
America fervently propagates incidents of terrorism in
other countries and also exerts pressure for condemning
such incidents, its Press, TV and Radio, however, did not
even bother to report this gruesome incident of arson. It
were the Muslims themselves who raised and activated over
the issue and the world knew about this tragedy. Neither
Governor Peter Wilson nor any other government functionary
uttered a single word about this heinous crime. When an
inter-state parliamentary delegation of Muslims met with
five officials of Foreign Affairs, they simply refused to
take notice of the incident. Instead, they complained about
the excesses of ‘Muslim extremists’ in Muslim countries.
[Had a church been torched in Pakistan or some other Muslim
country, then ...]. Earlier, when a Jew terrorist massacred
innocent Muslims at al-Khalil mosque in Jerusalem, the
response was equally apathetic.
Islam values human life
more than the place of worship. Leave aside the series of
attacks on Muslim in their homes and on roadside in
Britain, Germany, France and Belgium, has any Muslim
‘terrorist’ ever been involved in acts like drowning and
putting houses to torch and burning of people alive
therein? On the other hand, Muslims living in the countries
which campaign against terrorism continue to be the targets
of such brutal and heinous crimes. And the media gets
absolved of its duty by reporting such acts as incidents of
‘racism’, not terrorism. The victim is shown as a Turk, a
Moroccan, not a Muslim.
On May 29, 1993, terrorists
torched a Muslim house in Solingen, Germany. Two women and
two girls were burnt alive, one jumped out of the window
but succumbed to her injuries. This family was settled in
Germany for the last 20 years. This was not the first
incident of this kind (nor would it be the last!). In
November, 1992, fire bombs were thrown at two Muslim houses
in Molln, a city near Hamburg. A woman and two girls were
burnt alive in their beds and nine persons, though with
serious burns, survived. On May 01, 1995, at a rally of
presidential candidate Li Pan in Paris, three ‘skinheads’
killed a Moroccan Muslim, Ibrahim, by throwing him into the
River Sen and then themselves melted away in the crowd [Had
a Christian house been burnt in Pakistan, then...].
What did German Chancellor
Kohl do when three Muslim women and five girls were burnt
alive? He refused to attend the funeral of the victims of
arson in Solingen, nor did he go to their house. In fact he
has never visited a Muslim house which has been a victim of
such attacks. He does not even like to condemn such acts of
violence.
When two Americans were
killed in Karachi, America cried hoarse. FBI landed at
Karachi and though without proof weekly Time did not feel
shy in putting a caption "Islamic terrorism claims two
lives." On the other hand, the European governments have
failed to protect the Turkish diplomats and centres from
Armenian and Kurd terrorism. During two days in June and
November 1993, Kurdistan Workers Party carried out 75
terrorist activities a day against the Turks. Armenians too
have been involved in similar activities. But both the
media and the government have no grudge against or hatred
for them, perhaps on the plea that Armenians and Kurds are
oppressed. The question is: are Palestinians, Kashmiris and
Algerians not oppressed?
Framework for
Co-existence and Co-operation
We are not hesitant in
admitting that some Muslims were involved, and are
involved, in activities which are contrary to the
acknowledged and sacrosanct principles of the security of
life and property of innocent people, and some of these
activities might have been carried out with the abetting of
governments. These Muslims are certainly oppressed, weak
and wronged, some have been driven out of their own
countries and, therefore, are homeless for about half a
century, their youths are being killed, women molest and
houses burnt. Some are under the subjugation of such rulers
who depend on foreign support for the prolongation of their
rule, who are guilty of perpetrating oppression as well as
plundering the national wealth for their own luxury and for
the pleasure of their Western masters. According to the
Western philosophy of crime and punishment, all crimes of
such people deserve to be declared as legitimate acts. On
the other hand we have no hesitation in saying that in the
light of Islamic teachings their activities are
anti-Islamic and they should refrain from indulging in
them. These activities do not serve Islamic cause.
Human life is so precious
according to Islam that "murdering an innocent person is
just like the massacre of the whole of humanity" (Surah al-Ma’idah).
A Muslim is the one who protects others’ life, property and
honor through his deeds and speech (Sahih al-Bukhari). This
applies equally to both Muslims and non-Muslims. Even if a
polytheist (mushrik) asks for protection during
Wartime, he has to be provided protection and led to his
own place. (Surah al-Tauba). Killing of someone who is
asking for peace and reconciliation, is forbidden. Setting
a prisoner free is desirable. There is no room for beating
him while tied up. Excesses against women, children, the
old, the handicapped and the sick and burning of the crops
and the factories is not allowed even during the times of
war.
We also do not believe in
the argument that "your committing a crime sanctions our
committing it". Though the activities of Muslims which the
West considers as acts of terrorism are, in fact, nothing
as compared with similar activities of the West itself, we,
however, do not think such a comparison would be of much
use here.
We just want to ask the US
and the Western rulers, intellectuals and the media to stop
the dangerous game of fanning hatred against Islam and the
Muslim. The fire they are igniting may even wrap them. They
have slyly branded Islam as fundamentalism (which is, in
fact, a Christian term) and fundamentalism as terrorism (in
other words, a triangle: Islam-Fundamentalism-Terrorism).
This slyness, however, is not going to do any good either
to themselves or to the world at large. Incidents of
poisonous nerve gas in Japanese trains, bomb blasts in
World Trade Centre and Oklahoma should suffice to show the
extent to which the oppressed and the dedicated to a cause
can go. They may not necessarily be Muslims, however.
It is they who try to
convince the world that Islam and Muslims are a real
threat. In the policy paper of the state department
(October, 1985), Robert Oakley writes: indigenous terrorism
too is a serious problem. The FBI and the law enforcing
agencies would not let it grow out of control [Oklahoma
tragedy has exposed how capable they are!]. Real threat of
large scale terrorism is, however, from abroad, especially
from ‘Moslem’. Out of 52 documentaries telecast by ABC
Nightline in 40 months during 1985_1988, 48 were focused on
the Middle East. But when Newsweek reviews the
incidents during seven days before the Oklahoma tragedy, it
show Muslims’ involvement in only three of the total 13
cases.
As a result of fanning such
hatred, the confrontation between West and Islam is getting
worse and the hatred for America is spreading among
Muslims. Now, this hatred is no more restricted only to the
fundamentalists, it has encircled the most liberal and
secular intellectuals, journalists and leaders.
Is this a good omen? Is
this what America wants?
Muslims can establish good
relations with the West on the basis of mutual respect and
tolerance. For this, the foremost priority of Muslims is
that they have the right to lead their lives in accordance
with Islamic teachings. If it is accepted, then well and
good. Otherwise, Muslims will not hesitate even in laying
down lives in the struggle for having this right. The
Muslims living in the West would certainly be well-wishers
of their countries and respect the laws in vogue there.
Muslims’ second priority would be to get rid of their
despotic rulers who are Western agents and dance to the
tune of their masters. They would regain their right to use
their wealth and resources according to their own free
will. They would follow their own model for development.
This does not mean that they would necessarily work against
Western interests. In today’s world, economic and
scientific progress is possible only through co-operation,
but the West would have to end its policy of exploitation.
In this framework, if the
West does not insist on keeping the Muslims under their
political and economic domination the Islamic movements,
the fundamentalists and ordinary Muslims can prove good
friends of America and the West. They are not ‘sworn
enemies’ of America.
We fear if America and the
West insisted on their policy of enmity and hatred for
Islam and the Muslims, they will achieve nothing except
regrets. Mr. Robert Macknamara, the architect of the
Vietnam War during Kennedy-Johnson regimes, has recently
published his ‘confession of guilt’. After paying the price
of 60,000 American and 3,300,000 Vietnamese lives and
billions of dollars, he says: alas! our action was a
mistake, a big mistake... the reason was that we were
totally ignorant of the history, culture and the politics
of those people. Lest some other Macknamara has to say the
same after paying even more dearly, when opportunities are
lost.
We wish America and the
West realize their mistaken policies and restructure and
revive their relationship with the Muslim World.