Research Questions on Mitigating Religious Discrimination

Printable View

08-17-2013
Bill Moore

Research Questions on Mitigating Religious Discrimination

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...56&postcount=1

Thames22, a new member to SWJ, posted the following in his introductory remarks in the hail and farewell section. I think these are some great questions and suspect our community will have a lot of thoughts on this.

Quote:

I serve as the policy director of an independent U.S. government commission that advises the Executive and Legislative branches of government on foreign policy as it relates to religious freedom. My research focuses on, among other things, how violent religious extremists challenge U.S. national interests and what actions the U.S. government can take to mitigate those challenges. I have written widely on these subjects, focusing on South and Central Asia, the Middle East, and Europe.

Religion is a powerful force that validates governments and motivates peoples and societies, with history repeatedly proving the high cost of ignoring these dynamics. The 19th century military strategist Henri de Jomani in his treatise The Art of War deplored conflicts stemming from “religious dogmas” because they “enlist the worst passions, and become vindictive, cruel, and terrible.” Today, repression of religious actors is growing, in a world that is increasingly more religious. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has found the 3 out of every 4 people in the world live in countries that repress religion, and other survey work has found 80% of the global population believes in something greater than themselves. Overlaid together, the likelihood for increased conflict along religious lines is high, and these sectarian wars will be long, violent, and destabilizing to nations and entire regions.

Questions for Council Members

Quote:

1. So how can the United States advance stability in states going through political upheavals with a religious or sectarian element?

2. What actions can the international community take to prevent the growth of violent religious extremism in failing or failed states?

3. How should stability operations engage religious justice systems about human rights, women’s rights and minority rights?

4. How can civic space be enlarged to amply voices promoting religious tolerance?

These are questions I'm interesting in trying to answer and appreciate the wisdom of others. You can find an article I wrote for SWJ here that lays out some of my thinking:

http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art...ligious-actors Updated URL link which does work Bill

Here is a more recent article I wrote for the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs about combating religion based terror: http://journal.georgetown.edu/2013/0...y-knox-thames/
08-20-2013
graphei

First, welcome!

As for your superb questions, it's something we, I'm speaking for theologians and Scholars of Religion, are beginning to ask in earnest.

While there are plenty of different reasons why people pick up a gun and go fight, we know there are two groups that tend to be receptive to this ideology; either the ones with nothing to lose (the have nots) or those who those who feel powerless, disenfranchised, or alienated (and the combination of the two, as well!). Extremist propaganda, as I'm sure you're all well aware, focuses extensively on creating and reinforcing a binary; 'Us' vs' Them'. Religions- especially the Abrahamic ones- deal with binaries quite a bit; Sin and Salvation, heter and tereifa, shirk and tawhid. So this isn't unique to Islam in the least. What is rather unique to Islam is how many Muslims think of Islam, and how Islamists and Jihadists subsequently manipulate it.

Islam is about submission to the will of God. Period. Many Muslims believe that everything in the universe submits to the Divine will of God. Since humans lived in ignorance. God revealed Himself via Prophets. Since previous groups corrupted their messages and since God is wonderful and benevolent, He revealed his word again through Muhammad for one last time (Seal of the Prophets). Everything on how to live a proper life according to God's will is laid out- from cradle to grave. It governs action in almost very conceivable instance and they are graded from halal (permissive) to harem (forbidden). So, when outside forces come along and say "You're doing it wrong", it obviously creates tension. When extremists get ahold of it, it turns into jihad.

But we all know that isn't the whole story. Islam isn't any more repressive than Christianity or Judaism, per se. There are other forces at work magnifying these effects- Colonialism comes to mind. So, what is the difference? The difference, I think, is in discourse, and whose interpretation is perceived as being the most authentic. This is a nasty, nasty kettle of worms, let me tell you.

From my perspective as a student of Islamic Studies, one way to address those three questions you brought up is by re-engaging with the Islamic intellectual tradition. For too long, it's been the area of revisionist ulema fighting against the erosion in their power base and jihadists textually mining scriptures in their hunt for justification. By demonstrating these concepts and ideas are not purely Western as they've been lead to believe, but intrinsic to Islam and then drawing from the sura, hadith, and even shari'a, it can slowly shift the debate.

To this day, Islamists and Jihadists alike set the tone for how discussions on human rights are thought of in Islam. They say they're Western ideas, completely alien to Islam, and yet another way for the West to colonize Islamic lands, stripping them of their culture and identity. It is a declaration of war against Islam, and ultimately the nature of the universe itself. It is a cosmic jihad. Think I'm resorting to hyperbole? It's spelled out plain as day in both Qutb and Mawdudi, two men who form the ideological backbone of Islamist and Jihadi ideology.

One of the best resources I've found in describing the history of this predicament is Fazlur Rahman. He wrote Islam and Modernity: Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition back in the 80s. While I think his quadruple movement hermeneutic problematic, he does a superb job describing and analyzing the many forces that have brought us to this point in time. If you want to address issues in South Asia, his voice cannot be ignored. It's going to be on the reading list for the little book club I will be starting if folks haven't read it yet.

Also, along with those issues you raised, I cannot help but think how the issues of immigration and identity feed into this. Islamists in Egypt and Pakistan turned to the college students and provided them with that sense of self. I watched their legacy in action when I was studying for my Master's at SOAS in London. Many second generation Muslims are increasingly turning to Islamists for that sense of self since it is not being provided by their adopted homelands. Case in point, the ISOC's (Islamic Societies) were incredibly well organized and funded, not to mention very conservative and sympathetic to Islamist aims. Notable Islamic Feminist, Prof. Amina Wadud gave a lecture at one of the sister schools. The ISOC's planned 3 days of counter lectures to coincide with hers. While the student groups are quite careful, students frequently find their way to Hizb ut-Tahrir meetings from there.

As brief aside, I'm going to say Gender and Islam is a minefield for a lack of better words. I've spent about 8 years seriously studying it and it's a highly contentious subfield. Calling someone a Feminist can either be a great compliment or a slur. It's not a field to wade into lightly.

If you, or anyone else, want more recommendations, I can provide more resources and names.
08-20-2013
Bill Moore

I'll start with the fact I'm not a religious scholar, but having been in countries where Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and Christians have committed considerable violence that was at least in part due to their religion and the associated identity that came with it, I do have some opinions. I realize the current rage is all about Islamic extremists, but the challenge is much greater than Islam. In some respects we should be able to take an agnostic view of the problem and see commonalities.

Quote:

1. So how can the United States advance stability in states going through political upheavals with a religious or sectarian element?

It is difficult to advance stability when people are acting out rage based on religious or sectarian identities. Of course every situation will be different. I recall a person very much in the know and on the ground during the Rwanda slaughter thought the U.S. could have mitigated much of the bloodshed if the U.S. would have just jammed the radio station promoting the violence (we'll never know if that would have worked now), while it took a major Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge from continuing to slaughter tens of thousands of Khmers. Assuming we understood who the respected moderate voices were in such a conflict there is a slight, ever so slight, possibility that we could enable to speak to their people through our technology and stop the violence, but I think ideas like these tend to be promoted by those who don't have time on the ground and have a feel for the level of hatred that exists between these various groups.

2.

Quote:

What actions can the international community take to prevent the growth of violent religious extremism in failing or failed states?

I'm curious on why you focused on failing or failed states? Do you think this is the only place religious extremism can foment? I think the historical facts tell us otherwise. However, regardless of whether it is a modern, not so modern, or failed state I think the key to moderate extremism is religious education. This is contrary to the Western assumption that we should provide a secular education. Many of the terrorists I have studied were middle class kids that were recruited in college and came from non-practicing families. They didn't know what their religion was about, so they were vulnerable to those who taught them a more radical version.

3.

Quote:

How should stability operations engage religious justice systems about human rights, women’s rights and minority rights?

In our country that is easy, what makes you think we have a right to do so in another country?

4.

Quote:

How can civic space be enlarged to amply voices promoting religious tolerance?

Not by us.
08-20-2013
TheCurmudgeon

Don't like to agree with Bill (or anyone else), but ...

1. So how can the United States advance stability in states going through political upheavals with a religious or sectarian element?

In reality it can’t. Egypt should demonstrate the limited capability the US has to influence internal affairs even where there is a functioning government in place. In specific situations there may be carrots that we can offer but these are internal matters that are difficult to influence.

2. What actions can the international community take to prevent the growth of violent religious extremism in failing or failed states?

Directly addressing violent religious extremism, I am not sure that there are any. Indirectly, the international community can agree to deal with the issue of failed states by creating an UN sanctioned organization that can enter these areas and restore stability. This organization cannot be there to support any single concept of government. It will have to be willing to bend to what the local population finds appropriate, which may or may not include religious tolerance. So while this answer may provide no assistance to the end you are seeking to achieve it may limit the damage caused by violent religious (or ethnic) extremism as well as limiting future retribution committed to avenge the original attacks.

3. How should stability operations engage religious justice systems about human rights, women’s rights and minority rights?

Probably shouldn’t. As much as we may not like it these are local issues. This doesn’t mean that we stand by an allow genocide like the UN did in Bosnia and Rwanda or to allow inter-religious conflicts to continue but whether we can stop other strictly religiously sanctioned acts of violence against members of the same religion I am less sure about.

4. How can civic space be enlarged to amply voices promoting religious tolerance?

I think your emphasis on the civic space is wrong to start with. You assume away your problem by assuming you have a civic space that accepts the idea of religious tolerance. This is a very complex issue. Each society will present its own opportunities and challenges. Not sure a single answer exists.