REVIEW: There is no Islamic problem
mohammad
How and why 9/11 occurred, shattered the myth of America's supremacy of
power for a while, and provided a raison d'etre for the renewal of
'crusades' against Islam, as a religion and society, is a theme that
has seized the attention of western intelligentsia since the event and
led to a flood of books on the subject in the market. But the way this
sensitive subject has been treated and the explanations offered in most
of the essays, 20 in all, in this outstanding work by a Pakistani
economist who teaches in an American university, is inspiring.
The question commonly asked is: Is there an Islamic problem behind this
unthinkable tragedy? The answer the author gives is: there is no
Islamic problem - and, if any, it is a problem of temporary disruption
in the West's legacy of plunder, conquest and massacres to subjugate
the rest of the world. Two opposite visions dominate American
scholarship on Islam and Islamic societies. One represents Islam as an
enemy that must be destroyed, or otherwise it will destroy the West.
Its prominent advocates are Bernard Lewis, Daniel Pipes, Charles
Krauthammer and Martin Kramer.
The second vision tends to accommodate Islam and argues that since
political Islamists do not reject modernity, they must be given a
chance to run Islamic societies as this will, ultimately, either
discredit them or bring them into political mainstream of western
orientation. The upholders of the first vision, whom the author calls
"anti-Islam warriors", consider Islamic societies lagging in economic
development, deficit in democracy, and having "bloody borders" - a
phrase coined by Samuel Huntington.
The author, Shahid Alam, says the evidence fails to support these
charges. Although the Islamic countries do face numerous serious
economic problems, they are not worse or much worse than others.
Judging from the 1999 living standards, according to the World
Development Report, 2000, one can see Muslims have not done too badly:
Malaysia is well ahead of Thailand, Iran fares better than Venezuela,
Egypt is modestly ahead of Ukraine, Turkey is slightly behind Russia,
Tunisia is well ahead of Georgia and Armenia, etc.
Regarding bloody borders, Jonathan Fox has shown that Islam was
involved in 23.2 per cent of all inter-civilizational conflicts during
1945-1989 period and 24.7 per cent of these conflicts during 1990 to
1998. This is not too far above Islam's share in the world population,
nor is there any dramatic rise in this share since the end of the cold
war. Hence, Huntington's claim of "Muslim bellicosity" does not qualify
as a fact. Islamic societies have not suffered from democracy deficit
either. Incredible as it may appear, Tunisia, Egypt and Iran were in
the process of making a transition to constitutional monarchies during
the 19th century but their attempts were foiled by the West. In 1881,
the Egyptian nationalists had succeeded in convening an elected
parliament but the British disbanded it when they occupied the country
a year later. Tunisia promulgated a constitution in 1860, setting up a
supreme council with an intention to limit the powers of monarchy.
Ironically, the French suppressed this council in 1864 when they
discovered that it interfered with their ambitions in Tunisia.
Turkey elected its first parliament in 1877; it was dissolved by the
Caliph a year later. A second parliament was convened in 1908. In 1906,
Iran's first elected parliament adopted a constitutional monarchy
limiting the powers of the monarch but in 1911, with the support of
Russia and Britain, the pro-monarch forces defeated the
constitutionalists and the parliament was dissolved.
And in recent period, it has been oil, Israel and the old antipathy to
Islam that have kept democracy away from the Arab world. It is
interesting to note that the western donors have, especially after the
end of the cold war, used their financial leverage to encourage
democratization in client countries. But not so in the case of Arab
countries because democracy there could bring Islamists to power. They
do get enough support of various kinds so long as they come to terms
with Israel and are willing to suppress Islamist opposition. When Iraq
violated this understanding in 1990, it faced endless war and crippling
sanctions. Then, Algeria shows the fate a Muslim country can face if
the Islamists seek to capture power.
The author takes note of an essay written by a well-known physicist and
activist, Pervez Hoodbhoy, in December 2001 in which he argues that a
deadening obscurantism has paralyzed Islamic civilization since the
12th century and that the Muslims can end this paralysis only if they
decide to "replace Islam with secular humanism which alone offers the
hope of providing everybody on this globe with the right to life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness". This suggests, the author says,
Hoodbhoy has been raised "on a pure diet of Orientalism and its
falsification of Islamic history".
Shahid Alam refutes the claim of Eurocentrists and their Muslim
acolytes quite forcefully that religion and culture are the principal
source of backwardness of Islamic societies and its so-called antipathy
to science, rationality and modernity. He quotes a historical fact,
often ignored by the western scholars, that had the Egyptian bid to
industrialize - initiated by Muhammad Ali Pasha in 1810 - not been
dismantled by the European powers, the Middle East would have been
industrially transformed. But since an industrialized Middle East would
have renewed the "old threat of Islam", the European powers united to
abort Pasha's great initiative. In contrast, when Japan made a similar
industrial drive some 60 years later, Europe did not block it.
Referring to Hoodbhoy's advice to the Muslims to "give up the false
notions" of Islam, the author asks them instead to give up false
Orientalist notions of an Islam that has been misrepresented as
"irrational, fatalist and fanatical". Rational thinking, he says, did
not begin with the Enlightenment as the West claims. In fact, several
Enlightenment thinkers turned to Islam to advance their own struggle
against medieval obscurantism. Shahid Alam concludes his first chapter,
which is the core essay lending its name to the book, by suggesting
that the Muslims, a fourth of the world's peoples, are today seeking
their identity within a stream of history that flows from the Quran.
The Quranic impulse towards truth, justice, sincerity and beauty will
find _expression again, not in combat, but in a new Arabesque of
creative minds.
The book is divided into three parts: Islamic societies and the West,
Arabs and the United States, and Palestine and Israel. Each chapter
begins with a verse from the Quran , relevant to the subject-matter.
The author has devoted one chapter to Huntington's thesis "Clash of
Civilizations", calls it utter nonsense and demolishes his philosophy.
Another chapter takes to task Bernard Lewis, the doyen of the
Orientalists, who has actually been serving the Zionist interests for
50 years.
"Why 9/11 and why now" is a fascinating essay in which he says the
tragic event, irrespective of whoever engineered it, has incidentally
enabled the quartet of American Likudniks, Corporate America, the
Zionists and the Christian coalition to launch their project of a 'new
American century'.
=====================================================================
Is There an Islamic Problem? Essays on Islamicate Societies, the US and
Israel
By M. Shahid Alam
The Other Press, 607 Mutiara Majestic, Jalan Othman, 46000 Petaling
Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia
Website: www.ibtbooks.com
ISBN 983-9541-43-9
223pp. Price not listed