Mateen Siddiqu
Sept 21
(San Francisco Chronicle )
WHEN IT COMES to today’s headlines from Dagestan, Chechnya, Algeria, Palestine, Egypt and other Muslim nations, we often find the adjective “Islamic” applied to insurgent groups involved in fighting the legitimate governments of their nations. Some Muslims object to this characterization, arguing that because the actions taken by these groups contravene essential principles of Shariah, Islamic Divine Law, they should not be labeled Islamic.
To not label these groups “Islamic” would be to whitewash the truth, as they claim they are Islamic. Movements today in Dagestan, Chechnya and in many countries throughout the world are taking lives and inciting mayhem. And they are doing so in the name of Islam, Islamic government and Islamic law, but the question is what kind of Islam?
Having visited Chechnya, my magazine’s staff has first-hand experience with the militant Islamists seeking to overthrow Chechnya’s legitimate representative Islamic government. Their goal?
To replace it with one that is “more” Islamic. Chechnya was founded as an Islamic state. How, I couldn”t help wonder, could a government established with the blood of thousands of freedom-fighters and elected by the people to form an independent Islamic nation, be replaced by one that”s more Islamic? And how, I further wonder, could shedding the blood of fellow Muslims, as these groups have so consistently done, achieve that goal?
Attacks today are being directed as much at Chechen and Dagestani government officials as they are at Russians. Chechnya’s president, Aslan Maskhadov, has been attacked by “Islamic” militants five times, each time narrowly escaping with his life.
Just before our magazine’s staff visited Chechnya earlier this year, militant Islamists made an attempt on the life of the Grand Mufti of Chechnya — the nation’s highest religious leader. In 1998 the Mufti of Dagestan was blown up by an “Islamist” bomb as he emerged from prayer services in Machakhala. Though carried out by Muslims “in the name of Islam,” one has to ask, “What have these actions to do with Islam, the religion of love, peace and tolerance?”
Sadly, these militant Muslims defend such horrendous deeds using verses of the Holy Koran and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad, taking them out of context and applying them in ways contrary to established Islamic jurisprudence of 1,400 years.
These groups consist of a very tiny but well-financed and well-armed minority. They purpose nothing with these attacks but the creation of terror in the hearts of the masses.
In order to truly understand what is behind these movements, we must distinguish between the different types of Islamic movements around the world by designating them according to their creed or their political perspective. Thus readers will come to recognize their agendas.
By creating anarchy and lawlessness, these groups can enforce their own harsh, intolerant brand of Islam on the weak, the helpless and the uneducated. Such groups do not represent the common view of Islam, held by the vast majority of Muslims and Islamic scholars, for whom Islam exemplifies the paragon of civilization and perfected morality. They represent what is nothing less than a movement to anarchy, under an Islamic label.
Eventually, those who read headlines about Islamic terrorism will realize that Osama Bin Laden, Shaykh Umar Abdur Rahman and others represent a certain distinct understanding of Islam — politicized, rejectionist, reactionary and militant — one that calls for the overthrow of Muslim governments. In doing so, they justify the means by the end. Their intention is not so much to create an Islamic state, but to create a state of confusion in which they are able to thrive.
All Over the Globe is published by IPA House.
© 1998 IPA House. All Rights Reserved.