Author: Sunny Singh
Publication: South Asian Women's Forum
Date: August 8, 2005
URL: http://www.sawf.org/newedit/edit08082005/index.asp
The past few weeks have raised some of the
usual questions about Islamic fundamentalism and, more importantly, Islamist
terrorism. After two rounds of London bombings, (not to mention the Egypt
bombs and the recent Imrana case and the Ayodhya temple attack in India),
one is left with more questions than answers. Some questions I haven't found
answers to despite reading dozens of commentaries, analyses and essays from
around the world are as follows:
1. Why would European-born young men choose
to blow themselves and innocent people up?
2. If they are truly a minority within the
British-Muslim society, why did no one know about their plans or inform the
authorities about their increasing radicalisation?
3. And worse still, how many more such young
men are out there biding their time until the next attack?
Questions two and three have perhaps simpler
answers. Various newspapers in the UK have already carried accounts from Pakistani
relatives of the bomber Shahzad Tanweer about how they had warned his parents
that he was fraternizing with members of jihadi groups during his visits to
Pakistan. They have provided shocking details of how the young man carried
a picture of Osama bin Laden in his wallet. A cousin simply commented that
"if he has done what they say he has done, he has done the right thing."
No guilt, no remorse, no condemn! ation to be found then in Pakistan's villages
where the 7/7 bombers were mourned as heroes by thousands who gathered in
the mosques.
At the same time, a neighbour in Beeston explained
that the baby-faced picture carried by international media of Hasib Hussain
was misleading, because by the time of the London bombings, he was a hulking
frightening man with a thick beard and a propensity for getting into streetfights.
All this unfortunataly means one simple thing,
that so much of the media has been refusing to put in words: People knew!
There are people - family, friends, colleagues and neighbours in Beeston,
Dewbury and Pakistan - who knew that these young men were on their way to
becoming suicide bombers. And they chose to let them go ahead with their heinous
plans. How come we have absolved them of all responsibility? Simply in the
name of general civic harmony?
The third question is related and perhaps
even easier to answer: obviously many more young men in Britain and other
countries are willing to die and kill in the name of Islam. A recent Guardian
survey of the British Muslim community showed that 5% of those polled believed
that the London bombings were justified. Moreover, another survey showed that
nearly 10% of the British-born Muslims polled felt no loyalty towards Britain,
but felt they owed their allegiance to Islam. While this figure forms only
a small percentage of the population, it could still mean that numerically
thousands of British Muslims support the London bombings. We are in for troubled
times, indeed!
The first question, however, is possibly the
most difficult to answer. Left-leaning analysts in the UK have argued that
economic deprivation and cultural isolation led these young British-Pakistanis
to radical Islam. A large percentage of the local population has blamed British
involvement in the ill-advised and unpopular occupation war in Iraq. Yet all
these claims require some refuting, and not only of the neo-con variety that
promptly announces that "9/11 happened before Iraq war" or that
some how centuries of Western imperialism was to bla! me for the rise in fundamentalism
Islam today, basically because it created conditions of economic deprivation,
social alienation and political powerlessness.
None of the above arguments hold up to closer
scrutiny. While it is true that Arab/Muslim sense of grievances goes much
further back than the war on Iraq, as the neo-cons have pointed out, there
is a clear line to be drawn when we get to history. We in India are constantly
told to let the past lie for the sake of "communal harmony" and
not grudge the widespread destruction of temples all through north India and
the subsequent construction of mosques on the same sites. We are told that
is history, and with surprisingly little resistance, most of us agree with
that view and move forw! ard. So why do we permit a double standard for the
Arab/Muslim sense of grievance? Much has been made by British-Muslim commentrators
about the West's hypocrisy, yet they hardly pause to consider their own.
Furthermore, just how far are these grievances
based on facts is open to debate. Various fundamentalist organizations, ironically
based in or linked to Pakistan, and apparently fighting a world-wide jihad
use Palestine or Kashmir as their raison d'etre. However, we also know that
neither the Hizbollah or the Hamas, two of the best known "fundamentalist"
Islamist organizations in the Middle East, have shown any interest in any
struggle beyond their localized freedom struggles. Both have made necessary
adjustments with other religious and political groupings to conti! nue their
fight, with the Hizbollah initiating and forming alliances with not only Lebanese
Christian groupings, but also with the extremely secular Lebanese Communists.
A closer scrutiny also shows that the Palestinians,
as a people and as political organisations, have little sympathy for the apparently
"international" Islamist groups. Most Palestinians feel that their
legitimate freedom struggle is hampered and harmed by the fundamentalist hijacking
of that fight for purposes of an "international jihad."
Similarly, the use of "Kashmir"
issue as a justifiable grievance for Muslims world-wide is equally suspect.
The Kashmiri population - both Muslim and otherwise - enjoys far greater civil
and political freedom than that enjoyed by populations in most self-proclaimed
Islamic countries. If there is a section of the Kashmiri population that has
been systematically harassed, terrrorised, killed and hounded out of the region,
it is that of the minority community - the ill-fated Kashmiri Pandits. So
how does ethnic cleansing of the non-Muslim population provide grounds for
grievance to wage jihad?
The issue of economic deprivation is equally
suspect, given that most of the best known terrorist attacks have been carried
out by middle-class and well-educated men, such as the perpetrators of the
9/11 attack. Looking at British-born Muslims, the argument takes a further
beating: the murderer of Daniel Pearl was a British-born Pakistani with a
privileged background of public schools and university education at the famed
London School of Economics, hardly the prototype of the downtrodden poor.
Even the current round of bombings in London were carried out by men who were
hardly starving in the streets. Instead, one of them had been recently give!
n a red Mercedes, that ultimate Asian status symbol of having arrived, as
a gift by his father.
Moreover, if economic deprivation is the key
to turning young men and women into suicide bombers, why don't we see more
of those coming out of West Bengal and Bihar, where much of the population
still lives in desperate conditions. Oddly enough, even in Europe, the Bangladeshi
Muslms have shown less interest in joining their jihadi cousins, although
that may well change in the future.
So we finally get to the "cultural identity"
issue, where the standard argument trotted out by Western commentrators is
that somehow "Western" decadence offends and alienates Western-born
Muslims. Alcohol, sexual freedom and "football" yob-ism of the majority
European "white" community has been cited with immense self-hating
relish as the reason why European-born Muslims are turning to radical Islam.
It must be Western decadence that pushes these young men to jihad is the logic
behind this argument.
Apart from the simple response this raises
of "if they don't like the culture, why don't they move to Saudi Arabia,"
the cultural argument is so ridiculous that - if it were applied to a less
serious issue - one would be tempted to laugh it off. If it is "decadent"
Western values that the bombers didn't like, what about India?
Most Indians are frightfully straitlaced about
sex. In most places beyond elite urban enclaves, alcohol consumption is frowned
upon. For much of the country, the most "daring" outfit for a woman
is still a pair of jeans worn - in most cases - with a baggy tshirt or a full-sleeved
shirt. So can someone explain which part of the decadent "culture"
is pushing Indian Muslims to radical Islam? Which part of the "decadent"
culture in India justifies the Muslim "fatwah" against a lone brave
Muslim woman who admitted to being raped by her father-in-law? ! ; A fatwah,
by the way, that has been defended not only by opportunist politicians like
Mulayam Singh Yadav but also by the so-called "educated" Muslim
elite including Salman Khursheed.
So what drives relatively well-educated, fairly
privileged young men to kill themselves and others. Once again, unfortunately,
the common link between mercenaries in Iraq, Kashmir, and now Europe is Islam.
Whether it is some verse of the Koran or its fundamentalist interpretation
by semi-literate mullahs is for those who are better educated in Islam to
decide. For me, the proverbial infidel and kafir, the answer must come from
those who follow Islam.
However, from my position as infidel, and
an Indian one at that, I do have a suggestion for the Islamic leaders and
community. Stop playing victim! Somehow, all Islamist terrorism is explained
away as someone else's fault: the West doesn't allow political freedom or
economic growth in the Middle East. The Indian government doesn't allow Kashmir
to be brought under military dictatorship of an Islamic republic with long-standing
sympathies with the Taliban-brand of human rights. That Western democracies
allow "too much" political and social freedom to young men in Britain
who prefer to live on social security dole-outs while planning and executing
terrorist attacks instead of finding jobs that would let them participate
in the greater society.
For the sake of all of us, I think it is time
that Muslim leaders and communities stopped whining about persecution and
gave up finding excuses for why their young men prefer to kill themselves
and others instead of fighting for better lives. A good starting point would
be to answer some very simple questions, not at global, international political
levels, but at the level of parents and community leaders of Muslim communities
around the world:
1. How about taking responsibility for what
your young men and women do? Not only when they blow themselves and others
up, but also when they refuse to work, or to go to any school except madrassas
where they learn no skill but to recite the Koran, and thus willingly, even
knowingly, isolate and alienate themselves.
2. How about expecting your children to become
a Shahrukh Khan, APJ Abdul Kalam or Azim Premji? Or a poet like Mourid Barghouti?
None of them were born to privilege and yet grew to become true heroes in
vastly different fields. Doesn't the responsibility of teaching children to
dream lie with the parents?
3. More importantly, what about teaching the
young that to struggle to better oneself and one's own lot is truly the "greater
jihad," far more difficult but definitely higher than blowing oneself
up? That true change requires unstinting hard work and doesn't come easy,
but that it is possible.
4. And finally, how about pointing out to
these silly young men that blowing oneself up in the London metro or a Kashmiri
marketplace or an Iraqi mosque is the act of a coward. And no God allows a
space for a coward in heaven!
Perhaps this is the infidel's way, of taking
responsibility for oneself instead of continually complaining of being victims.
If that is so, there is much to learn from it.
FINAL NOTE: The lack of sincere remorse in
Beeston became increasingly apparent when alleged "colleagues" and
neighbours of the 7/7 bombers chose the names of Bollywood heroes as aliases
in their comments to the unsuspecting Western media. Shahrukh, Sunil Shetty
and Sanjay Dutt were the top choices. For those of us who have learnt just
how often Brit-Asians will evoke Bollywood references as a secret linguistic
and cultural code unknown to this country's majority community, the trend
was saddening, worrying, frightening, but beyond all, disgusting.
Till we connect again...
Sunny Singh was born in Varanasi. She received her education in various parts
of India and the world.
She has worked as a journalist, teacher, and as a management executive for
multinationals in Mexico, Chile and South Africa. For the last four years,
she has been writing full-time. She is also a playwright.
Her first play, Birthing Athena, focussed on evolving relationships and the
price of ambition in post-liberalisation India. The Times of India described
the play as "an intensely cathartic experience."
Her first novel, Nani's Book of Suicides, had been published by Harper Collins
Publishers India. Described by the Hindustan Times as a "first novel
of rare scope and power," the novel explores the cultural identity of
an Indian woman through a fund of myths, family lore and contemporary reality.
Her second book, Single in the City: The independent woman's handbook was
released on Dec 22, 2000 by Penguin India. Visit Sunny Singh's website at:
http://www.sunnysingh.net/
