Off the shelf
Islam does not prescribe terrorism
V. N. Datta

The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror
by Bernard Lewis. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London. $19.95. Pages 144.

THIS is a wonderful book written by an established scholar of Islamic history, thought and culture, which helps us understand Islam and the Muslim world today from the historical, juridical, philosophical and political perspectives. The author explains some of the keywords like jihad, fatwa, ulema, shariat, mufti, terrorism and pan-Islamism etc. which have now become a part of international political vocabulary.

In the introduction, Lewis highlights the growing conflicts between America and the perpetrators and supporters of terrorism, who threaten the life and security of the people of the world. He also attempts to analyse the issues involved in those conflicts and the impact of these on international politics by focussing on Osama-bin-Laden and his activities.

Laden’s interview that he gave to John Miller of ABC News on May 28, 1998, was highly significant. In this interview, after extolling the fighting qualities of the Muslim youth who were prepared to die in the defence of Islam, Laden mocks the "cowardice of American soldiers notorious for fleeing from the battlefield". He condemns America for playing a wicked role in the Gulf War by using Saudi Arabia as a base for launching an attack on Iraq.

The author reproduces the text of the statement given by Laden and the jihad groups in Egypt that was printed in an Arabic newspaper, Al Quds al-Arabi. The text written in exquisite Arabic prose sets forth cryptically the Muslim grievances interspersed with sayings of Prophet Muhammad.

In the statement, a virulent tirade has been directed against America for occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of its territories, plundering their riches with reckless abandon and embarking on aggression against the neighbouring Islamic people.

"Exposing" the sinister American religious and economic motives, the statement condemns the American policy of wilful destruction of Iraq. According to the statement, the American actions perpetrated with vengeance are a declaration of war against God, His Prophet and the Muslims. In such a perilous situation, when the very Muslim existence is at stake, the statement calls upon the entire millat to fulfil their bounden duty of launching jihad and killing Americans and their allies, both civil and military, until the holy places, the Al-Aqsa mosque (in Jerusalem) and the Al-Harem mosque (in Mecca) are liberated from their control and until their armies are forced to leave the lands of Islam and rendered incapable of threatening any Muslim again.

In the first chapter, Defining Islam, Lewis emphasises that Islam is not only a matter of faith and practice, but also an identity and loyalty. God is seen in Islam as the sovereign, making the state as theocracy, but not so if it is a government run by priesthood. The emergence of the priestly hierarchies in the assumption of ultimate authority in the state, being absolutely a modern phenomenon which the late Aytollah Khomeini projected, is anti-Islamic.

Lewis regrets that there are sweeping generalisations made by scholars about Islam and its attitude towards the West. He asks the fundamental question whether or not Islam is prone to violence and posing a threat to the West. Various answers have been given. One school of thought says that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Islamic fundamentalism poses the biggest threat to Western civilisation.

According to the other school of thought, the Muslims are decent, peace-loving people, who are driven to it by the West; and their protest should be seen as a sort of defence mechanism for protecting their way of life from the Western onslaught. Of course, there are a large number of firm and convinced Muslims who extol the virtues of Western institutions like democracy and the scientific mode of inquiry which gives rise to new technology. However, it is true that some of the Muslims in general and their present-day leaders see the West as their ancient irreconcilable foe and, for them, there is no way but war unto death to follow the commandments prescribed by their faith.

Controversies still persist on the meaning of the term jihad, particularly used in the context of present-day political situation in the world. According to the author, Prophet Muhammad had launched jihad by using the armed forces against the infidels, rebels and apostates. During his Mecca period, the Prophet’s mission was peaceful, but in Medina, he headed the state and commanded to vanquish the enemies. Thus, jihad came to acquire a specific meaning of making war a moral obligation for the Muslims in defence of righteousness and earning the title of martyr (shaheed) whose reward is eternal bliss, though originally, jihad had meant striving and making efforts for self-purification.

The militant organisations have been fighting in the name of jihad in Kashmir, Pakistan and Chechnya. However, the author makes it clear that at no point the basic texts of Islam enjoin terrorism and murder. Some scholars believe that jihad does not prevent the Muslims from seeking support from the Christians against their Muslim rivals.

After giving a broad survey of the role of France, England and Germany in West Asia, Lewis states that the era which had been inaugurated by Napoleon Bonaparte was ended by Mikhail Gorbachev and the elder George Bush. The Iranian revolution in 1979 and the Gulf War in 1991 had a tremendous impact on the Muslim world. Henceforth, America began to be looked upon as the main enemy of the Muslims.

Concluding his brilliant study, Lewis laments the existing clash between Islam and the West for which he offers no remedy. He also laments that of the 59 member states of the Organisation of Muslim Conference, only Turkey has made a genuine effort to function as a democracy. The record of the rest is poor. Militancy is seen in some Muslim countries as a protracted socio-economic, political and religious unrest, but violence and terrorism can in no way be justified. Both perceptions present a predicament, a dialectical jam that exasperates us today. Statesmanship of the highest order is the only answer.

HOME