Blaming the United States, Israel, or Capitalism Is Not the Solution

Abstract

The majority of participants (Cohen, Esposito, Fuller, and Khan) shared the concern that militant and violent adherents of radical political Islam – “jihadis,” for lack of a better term – may not only radicalize the West’s attitude toward western Muslims, but, more importantly, toward Islam as a whole. Indeed, the continuation of terrorism against western interests will likely result in either an American or a combined western future response – both political and military. The result of either action may be greater involvement by the United States in the greater Middle East, although, ironically, one needs to remember that it is the radicals who would, in fact, prefer that this country pull out of the region. Terrorism is also the cause of what some authors refer to as “Islamophobia,” a phenomenon that remains quite rare despite the events of 9/11. Though 2004 saw a greater number of anti-Jewish incidents reported in the United States than anti-Islamic incidents, one could assume that the jihadis would prefer to see anti-Muslim incidents carried out by Americans to increase. One reason for this could be that aberrant American actions, especially if they are blown out of proportion by media in the United States and abroad, will radicalize Muslims and cause the jihadis’ ranks to swell. Additionally, Cohen, Esposito, Fuller, and Khan also agreed upon the necessity for a broader interpretation of the meaning of ijtihad as a tool of modernization for the Muslim world. However, one of the other participants, Jan, formulated a traditionalist/fundamentalist position regarding ijtihad, viewing it as a tool that only the ulama can wield. He believes that mass and elite indoctrination along the lines of traditional orthodox Islam will bring about the establishment of a pan-Islamic state along the lines of a khilafah. Most of other participants disagreed with such a prognosis. Unfortunately, Esposito, Fuller, and Jan launched quite vitriolic and misplaced attacks against the supporters of Israel. They refer to them by different names: “pro-Likud Lobbies,” “extremists,” or supporters of the “Zionist state.” The topic of Arab-Israeli relations has little to do with the questions at hand: moderate Islam vs. radical Islam, and the future of political Islam. If Israel never existed, the extremists would identify other issues to fight about. Israel-bashers, fall prey – or are, indeed, intentional mouthpieces for – a conspiracy theory of the worst kind: an ideological canard, that the United States, or even the world, is run by the Jews. These modern simulacra certainly resemble something out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Czarist secret service (Okhrana) piece of anti-Semitic disinformation, or the vitriolic rhetoric of Der Sturmer, the Nazi propaganda weekly rag. Take Jan’s 2003 discussion of Husain Haqqani’s article in The Nation: … there are well-studded gems for pleasing [the] master of our destiny, the Zionists in the U.S… Realising Zionist power, the chief opportunist, General Musharraf, took the lead through covert promises of recognising Israel during his visit to the U.S.[2] The intellectual mercenaries are now trying to catch up with some confused mixture of rejecting Musharraf and accepting Israel ...