by
Anisa Abd el Fattah
It
is difficult at this stage in the game to determine whether America
is gearing up for a war on terrorism or a campaign against
terrorism. The two might be significantly different. If we are at
war the rules are different, and each of us must understand what the
rules are. A nation at war is a nation that is on the alert. It has
identified an enemy and is seeking to destroy the enemy, perhaps
through various methods. In this case the enemy has been identified
as
"terrorism."
Lacking an official definition, the war becomes a alarming idea for
Muslims, and particularly Islamic movements, if we are operating on
a political definition that is constructed by the historic enemies
of Islam who have sought for the better part of the last century to
stereotype all Muslims and Islamic activism as terrorist. If, on the
other hand, we have mounted a serious campaign against
"terrorism,"
having adopted a definition that recognizes terrorism as a method
and strategy utilized not only by individuals, but also by
governments in attempts to impose their authority through brute
force where they lack legitimacy, it may be that there is still time
for Islamists to make some important points that can assist the
nation as it moves forward in this campaign. In fact, one of the
most important decisions that our administration will be making in
this campaign is the role that Islamic movements will play in a long
term, on-going campaign against terrorism.
There are those who would discourage our government from employing
the assistance of Islamists. They are seeking to advance the idea
that organized Islamic political activism fosters terrorism. This is
not news, but a very dangerous insinuation in times such as these,
and the enemies of Islamic activism and movement are very much aware
of the scenario they are seeking to create. By casting all Islamic
movements as terrorist, or potentially terrorist, people like
Benjamin Netanyahu and others, are seeking to employ the United
States in their personal and national campaign against Islam,
Muslims, and the Islamic Movements, especially in Palestine and
their supporters. The United States should avoid being used, or
rather exploited. This is a time when the nation's
leaders must be wise, and distinguish its friends from its foes,
based not on the past, but perhaps based on which direction those
who are seeking to influence the United States are seeking to direct
us. Friends will focus on the positive aspects and potentially
positive outcome of this crisis; others will seek their own
interests and the exploitation of American fears, along with the
elimination of their foes at America's
expense; our soldiers'
lives and our rights included.
The Islamic movement has a vast network of activists throughout the
Muslim world who have the ability to influence popular perceptions,
as well as to garner information, and to share information with key
players in both the East and the West.
To those who ask why the Islamic movements would assist in a
campaign of this nature, playing such roles, the answer is that this
is the very reason that Islamic movements came into being. It has
always been the role of the Muslim activist to identify evil and to
work cooperatively to eliminate it. Muslims understand the evil of
terror perhaps better than most people, since we have been the
victims of terror to a greater degree than any other group of
people, the ongoing conflict in Palestine being just one example.
Islamists understand the politics of the region, and unlike the
governments who are not trusted by the people in the villages and on
the ground, Islamists enjoy credibility in the Muslim world, and
their commitment to Islam and law, in spite of political and
economic enticements, have distinguished them from the traditional
intelligence gathering
"ilk"
that are hated and often misdirected and misinformed.
A campaign against terrorism would seek to eliminate, not only
terrorists, but more importantly, to discredit
"might
makes right"
as legitimizing, since terrorism, regardless of what form it takes,
is premised upon this falsehood. If we seek to understand terrorism,
we will arrive at the conclusion that those who employ terrorists
tactics must feel that they can scare, or intimate people into
submission to their ideas, or ways, and their authority. Whether
groups employ these methods or governments, the fact that mere brute
strength unbridled by morality, has been allowed to dictate the
world's
affairs until now, has led us to this juncture, and the horrible
tragedy of September 11, 2001.
Along with a military response to terrorism, there should be an
international effort mounted that is aimed towards exposing,
discrediting and denouncing immoral political and social policies
that have placed brute strength in the path of peace and progress,
human rights and justice, and that suggests that whoever can kill
the most people, or scare enough people, can dictate the fate of the
world. Those nations or individuals or groups who are unwilling to
yield their affection for militarism as solutions to every conflict,
and who reject opportunities for peace, who instigate war and
destruction whether this be through economic or military means,
should be considered enemies of humanity, and everyone should
condemn them. The tragedy of September 11, 2001 can have a positive
outcome if we recognize it as a wakeup call, signaling the leaders
of the world to the fact that they have taught the wrong lessons.
They have persistently used the wrong tactics to achieve political
objectives, and have caused the world to fall victim to a most
heinous enemy, that being aggressive and intolerant chauvinism,
which manifests as terrorism.
Everyone should be employed in the campaign to eradicate terrorism.
Islamists have an important role to play. If our government is wise,
it will bring them on board as allies in this important and
universal struggle.
The writer is director for
Public Affairs at the United Association
for Studies and Research (UASR), a Washington, DC area Islamic
think tank.