Terrorism Against USA
by A.K.Verma
Terrorism against US is a product of a complex phenomenon. Its roots
lie in the nature of Islam which means different things to different
people.
However, there are two constants, the Qoran and the Sharia. All shades
of Muslim opinion derive their authority from these constants but
interpretations vary widely.
To the average liberal of the contemporary world, certain Qoranic
concepts will appear quaint or anachronistic. Following is a brief list:
* Allah’s sovereignty: All things are subordinate to His
will. But how is the will of an abstract entity to be determined? The
Mullah then slips in and claims the authority which at once makes any
Islamic system Unitarian, nonsecular and non democratic. It is for these
reasons, democracies do not flourish in Islam. Democracies subscribe to
the view that a democracy is of the people, by the people, for the
people.
* The Ummah is one and indivisible. This principle calls for
one God, one people, one nationalism. But multiplicity is the natural
human norm. Thus there is a conflict between natural evolution and
imposed obligations, creating an environment of "them versus
us".
These two concepts are basic to the growth of fundamentalism in Islam.
For the fundamentalist, religion and politics are one and the same and
authority flows from the former to take control of politics and the State,
to conform to the identity as prescribed by the scriptures. He accepts no
interpretation of the scriptures other than his own, aimed at seeking his
own political objectives, which are to create one Ummah and establish rule
of purity of the Allah.
The tools for the exercise are terrorism and Jehad. The US is being
increasingly identified as the target by the fundamentalist. It is being
seen more and more as the one State leading towards the consolidation of
the world into an ideology of nonconformism, secularism and democracy.
Such a philosophy creates disenchantment throughout the Islamic world
whether it be Syrians, Egyptians, Palestinians, Algerians, Sudanese,
Iraqis, Talibans or Pakistanis. The extremists among them respond in an
identical manner, unifying their energy, and desiring to build up a global
front. The non militant sections of the Islamic world watch this
phenomenon by and large either as passive partners or paralysed
bystanders. They may subscribe to the formulation that fundamentalism and
the terrorism it generates are not the true faces of Islamic faith, but
rarely will they raise a voice of protest. This tacit acceptance of the
fundamentalist or extremist vision rules out a debate within the Islamic
world over the genuine values of the Islamic faith. The Gurus of
fundamentalism or extremism may not number many but those who question
their approach would number even less.
The terrorist develops from the followers of such Gurus. He dedicates
himself body and soul to the cause. He enthusiastically accepts that
beyond the purpose, he has no individual identity or existence. Without
any second thought he is ready to do and die.
This brief narrative spells out the nature and magnitude of the problem
for the US which the terrorist strikes of Sept. 11 have brought out to the
fore. Bin Laden is not the lone enemy of the US. Its real enemy is the
system of thoughts and beliefs that want to rid the world of what is seen
as the corrupting influence and monumental arrogance of and outrage of the
Islamic dignity by the US. In reality therefore what US faces is the
enmity of an abstract idea which pervades an empire of people and assumes
the shape of an ideology. In the previous century two insidious ideologies
were eliminated, fascism by war and communism (almost) by a coalition of
measures, short of war. The ideology which now threatens to scourge the
democracies of the world, has also to be fought out through a coalition of
like minded nations. US cannot do it alone nor should it see it as a
danger to its national interests alone.
The locus of this threat today broadly is in South Asia. Fundamentalism
and terrorism received a new life during the struggle against the Soviet
Union in Afghanistan. The struggle was glorified as a Jehad and the
disintegration of the Soviet Union was celebrated as the victory of the
Jehad. Volunteers came from different corners of the world to push forward
the Jehad in Afghanistan. They continued to come and get trained, even
after the fall of the Soviets, to lend their services and sacrifice their
lives in other trouble spots where they felt Islam or its people were
threatened. The emergence of Talibans is tantamount to the emergence or
the largest Jehadi outfit ever. Its ideological mentors make no secret of
their future plans and designs. It has been publicly proclaimed that the
focus of the Jehad now is the axis of US, Israel and India. Bin Laden and
Talibans are not the only philosophers and guide of such a movement.
Groups in Pakistan such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaish-e-Mohd., Jamait-e-Islam
and the ISI are also active contributors, perhaps with their own separate
objectives and agendas.
In the ultimate analysis what is threatened are the fundamental values
of humanity. Islam does not threaten these values but an absolutist
ideology, anchoring itself in Islam, does. The danger thus is not to US
alone but to the whole world including several Muslim nations. Such an
invidious ideology has to be responded to by all right thinking nations
and people together in their collective interest. US should accept this
fact and not work selectively in its interest alone.
However, it requires to be noted that the nature of the terrorist
threat will vary from country to country depending upon the context and
therefore the responses may not be undifferentiated. In India the
objectives of the terrorists are both ideological and territorial as it
would be in Palestine and Philippines as well. In the case or the US it is
purely ideological. A coalition against terrorism is more likely to
succeed in support of the larger objectives of counter terrorism only if
individual national interests are not made the touchstone to guide a
common policy.
(The writer is a former Secreatary of Cabinet
Secretariat.)
