Author: N.S. Rajaram
Publication: The American Thinker
Date: July 22, 2005
URL: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4667
Jihad is the 'evil ideology' that
is driving terrorism. Muslims should take the lead in rooting out this
barbarism.
Early reports indicate that
there were no fatalities from four coordinated explosions that again targeted
Londons' transit system yesterday, July 21, 2005, exactly two weeks after
the Islamikaze carnage of July 7, 2005 that killed over 50 persons. Perhaps
we will also be spared the surreal drama that is enacted each time there
is a major Islamikaze terrorist attack: politicians and various other "experts"-non-Muslim
and Muslim alike-start praising Islam. They tell us that Islam is a noble
religion that stands for peace and compassion and abhors violence. This
is what Mr. Tony Blair did immediately following the London bombings of
7/7/05. It is now all but an obligatory ritual.
The major players in this post-attack
drama are Muslim leaders and academics. They voice apprehensions about
the possible 'backlash' against innocent Muslims, resulting from the terrorist
acts of a minority. They assure us that the terrorists are acting against
the teachings of Islam. This is soon followed by a third act, an airing
of Muslim grievances- the war in Iraq, the Palestinian problem, and of
course the oppression of Muslims in non-Muslim countries like Britain.
The talk is always about backlash and grievances, rarely about their own
responsibility in allowing fanaticism to flourish in their midst.
In all this there is an unstated
assumption that the root causes of terrorism lie outside the teachings
of Islam. If that is the case, how are we to explain the fact all the terrorist
attacks-from New York to London to Bali-have one thing in common: that
they were perpetrated by groups acting in the name of Islam? It is hard
to believe that the Bali bombings had anything to do with Iraq or Palestine.
In this drama of denial and diversion,
there is always a reluctance to mention the one word that goes a long way
towards explaining terrorism: Jihad. While Mr. Blair talked about an evil
ideology of hate, he did not mention Jihad. Neither did the British Muslim
leaders who promised full cooperation. All spoke in vague terms- about
fighting 'extremism and fundamentalism' without telling us how.
At this moment of crisis, what the
world needs is clarity, not obfuscation. Fortunately, we have a lucid explanation
of Jihad and terrorism by one of the founding fathers of modern terrorism,
the late General Zia-ul-Haq, former president of Pakistan. He sponsored
one Brigadier Malik to produce an authoritative military manual on Jihad
called The Quranic Concept of War.
In his laudatory foreword to the
book, General Zia wrote:
"JIHAD FI-SABILILLAH (Jihad in the
path of Allah) is not the exclusive domain of the professional soldier,
nor is it restricted to the application of military force alone. The book
brings out with simplicity, clarity and precision the Quranic philosophy
on the application of the military force, within the context of the totality
that is JIHAD."
Indeed it does. Brigadier Malik
writes,
"the Holy Prophet's operations .are
an integral and inseparable part of the divine message revealed to us in
the Holy Quran. . The war he planned and carried out was total to the infinite
degree. It was waged on all fronts: internal and external, political and
diplomatic, spiritual and psychological, economic and military."
Another point made by the author
is that the war should be carried out in the opponent's territory. "The
aggressor was always met and destroyed in his own territory." The 'aggressor'
is anyone who stands in the way of Jihad.
Where does terrorism come in the
picture?
"The Quranic military strategy thus
enjoins us to prepare ourselves for war to the utmost in order to strike
terror into the heart of the enemy, known or hidden."
It doesn't stop here, for Brigadier
Malik assures us:
"Terror struck into the hearts of
the enemy is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition
of terror into the opponent's heart is obtained, hardly anything is left
to be achieved. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy;
it is the decision we wish to impose upon him." (Original emphasis.)
That is to say, the enemy should
be made to live in a state of perpetual terror. We should be grateful to
Brigadier Malik and the late General Zia for spelling it out with such
clarity. We no longer need to grope in the dark to identify this "evil
ideology of hate" in Mr. Blair's picturesque phrase.
Though little known in the West,
The Quranic Concept of War is widely studied in Islamic countries. It has
been translated into several languages including Arabic and Urdu (the official
language of Pakistan). Indian soldiers have recovered Urdu versions of
the book from the bodies of slain militants in Kashmir.
It is no coincidence that the trail
of terrorism today should lead to General Zia. By making Jihad the
centerpiece of Pakistan's politics he ensured that Jihadist thinking would
dominate all aspects of Pakistani politics in both domestic and foreign
affairs. And now British investigators have determined that three of the
four suicide bombers responsible for the carnage in London on 7/7/05 were
Muslims of Pakistani descent, who had recently flown to Karachi and attended
Pakistani madrassas known to be run by terrorist organizations.
That this barbarous act of terrorism
has indelible links to Pakistan is hardly surprising-for at least a quarter
century, Pakistan has been a fountainhead of jihadist ideology-embodied
in the The Qur'anic Concept of War-and a tactical training center for jihad
terrorists. Indeed, even during the current Musharaf administration's
purported crackdown on Al Qaeda networks, as terrorism expert Con Coughlin
observed,
".the inescapable conclusion is
that Pakistan forms the epicentre of Osama bin Laden's unremitting campaign
of terror against the West."
In the face of this, Mr. Blair's
actions in the days following the London blasts are not reassuring. Plans
to deport all known Muslim fanatics allowed into Britain may accomplish
little. Islamic terror is increasingly becoming home grown and will be
more so in the future. What is needed is a method of combating indoctrination
of young Muslim minds on English soil.
The so-called "blasphemy law" recently
passed by the House of Commons is a knee-jerk reaction to pressure from
Muslim groups. It will only shield Islam from honest review and criticism
that the situation now demands. It is just a step removed from allowing
Islamic courts and an Islamic thought police to function. This is what
one expects in countries like Saudi Arabia, not Britain.
What is needed now is the exact
opposite of such censorship: a free debate over all aspects of Islamic
teachings and practices, especially Jihad. After all, Christianity and
Hinduism, the other two major religions of Britain enjoy no such immunity.
Nor have they asked for it.
Muslim leaders need to go beyond
condemning violence and voicing grievances. They need to root out this
evil from within their ranks. If they are really sincere about fighting
terrorism, they should come out openly against the barbarism that is Jihad,
and not hide behind vague statements about extremism and fanaticism. Mere
lip service will not do.
Dr. N.S. Rajaram is a mathematician
and historian of science. He lives in Oklahoma City and Bangalore, India
