Muslims are divided into 3 camps: those who believe Usama bin Laden was involved in the 9-11 attacks; those who don’t; and lastly, those who think Usama is America’s just desserts.
Whatever his guilt, or non-guilt, those Muslims who think he was involved- and this includes, surprisingly, the Saudis (all too eager to disassociate themselves from him)- have started to give his ideology some interesting labels. Qutbist, Azzamists, Sufis; but the one that tickled me the most is probably binLadenism.
I think the name is a study in self-deception. Don’t get me wrong. I accept the term binLadenism. Nonetheless, it is simply an offshoot of a parent ideology that some analysts have, for better or for worse, called Islamism. Bin Laden is simply a student who expresses it in its most murderous form.
A lot of Muslims object to the term Islamism, because it hits too close to home.
But let’s not deceive ourselves. Islamism has links to Islam. If you consider this offensive, then your wrath should rightly turn upon those who have constantly promoted this connection – the terrorist jihadists themselves, and their cheerleaders.
That the jihadist ideology is rooted in Islam is clear, at least, in the minds of the jihadists. How close this connection is depends on the Muslim community itself. It has nothing to do with Islam, but with how its followers interepret it. They take Islam from the hands of the traditionalists and twist it into an ideology, a man-made ‘-ism’, if you will. I think most Muslims agree that extremists have an extremely (pardon my pun) selective reading of Islam. Nonetheless, the source is Islam.
I disagree with confining the ideology to just one man, for even with Usama dead, the ideology goes on. Indeed, the ideology existed even before him. George Bush initially began his so-called war on terror by using such a restrictive definition. He thought America’s woes would end with the demise of just one man. But he has learned otherwise in recent years. The ideology is widespread, fueled in part by American policies toward the Middle East. Reccomendations for strengthening the voices of the ‘moderates’ is accepted as one of the long-term strategies of the misappropriately-named ‘war on terror’. The US administration recognizes the difference between Islam and Islam-ism, though it might not hold true for lay people.
This is unfortunate, but I lay the blame directly on those extremists who have sought, more enthusiastically than any Christain fundamentalist, to link Islam to their cause. The fact that more and more Muslims are falling for their rhetoric is a testament to the ongoing battle between what is true Islamic justice, and what some Muslim scholars dub the delicious power of ‘instant gratification’. Many western analysts, including the authors of the 9-11 Commission Report, predict that a confrontation between the moderates and extremists is inevitable. There are too many contradictions between Islam and Islam-ism, after all.
This meeting, whose signs we already see, might well be the ace in the deck of cards. It might change everything, or it might break everything.
I, for one, am on the side of those Muslims who stand up for true Islam.
If you would like to make a comment, please fill out the form below.
Recent Comments