Editorial

The neo-conservative lobby that currently formulates the foreign policy of the United States of America is guided by certain popular assumptions i.e., that political Islam is monolithic, violent, singularly focussed against the US and that inter-mingling of politics and religion is unique to Islam only. The phenomenon of political Islam is a modern one and not a recent one. Its roots lie in the 19th and 20 century’s political conditions. It can be attributed to two shifts in power. 1-The West growing more powerful than the East and gaining more political, military and economic influence and 2-there was an internal power shift within the Muslim countries where a West educated elite was put at the helms in nations created on ethnic lines without any concern for historical and geographical realities. This is why one sees Islamist political formations taking centre-stage as the only avenue for political activism as well as opposition against repressive regimes dancing at the fingers of the erstwhile Western colonial masters.

Even this Western media propagated myth also needs to be dispelled that violence is employed by the mainstream Islamist organisations to oppose the oppression. In fact all the mainstream Muslim organisations, viz, Jamaat –e- Islami in the sub-continent, Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, FIS in Algeria, ITM in Tunisia, Rifah-Justice-Virtue parties in Turkey or Masjumi Party in Indonesia have been in the fore-front in opposing the use of violent means. Only repression against their legitimate political activity led the extremists in their ranks to shun the path of non-violence. Wasn’t the FIS forcibly barred from electoral process in Algeria while it was poised for winning a massive mandate even as the West watched in silence, nay acquiescence. Yet, several of these Islamic parties still channel political activism through parliamentary, democratic and constitutional means available. They run schools, interest-free societies, media, maintain publications and groom talents in diverse fields and commit themselves to elections, multi-party democracy, gender justice and human rights.

Even other ideologies interwine politics with religion and Islam alone should not be singled out as a unique culprit that permits and demands mixing. Zionism is basically political. Hindutva, as we have witnessed in India, is a political as well as parochial ideology that feeds upon hatred against Muslims and Christians and distorts history for its political gains in the contemporary society. But political Islam perhaps receives negative reception in the West because it does not submit to hegemony of the West but challenges it – with an alternative socio-economic and political code – while other political ideologies seek to form alliance with it.

Islam’s challenge of Western control dates back to the 18th century. In comparison to other civilizations, Islam’s relations with the West is a product of a reversal of power which put Muslims on a continuous quest for dignity. This has perpetuated a certain sentiment against the United States. Muslims’ sense of outrage at dignity being violated usually takes the form of anti-Americanism. For most Muslims, the antipathy is based on America’s foreign policy, especially the blatant uses of double standards in relation to the Middle East. Muslims question the US’ credibility of the State Department’s desire to see a ‘Free World’ in the wake of the collapse of the Berlin Wall when they see a sturdier variant of it coming up in the Occupied Palestine. They see in Iraq and Afghanistan a design to make the world safer for Israel, a guarantee for continuous oil supplies for the US and contracts for the MNCs controlled by the neo-con clique.

Many of these concerns relating to dignity come together on the issue of Palestine. The State Department appears more concerned about peace in the Middle East. But the justice of the cause is always dismissed by the West as ‘irrational fanaticism’.

No doubt the Islamists’ rhetoric resonates with the Muslim people for material reasons relating to inequities of domestic and international distribution of power. But much wind could be taken out of hardliners’ sails if they are brought into the political mainstream.