Terrorism and terrorists<\/p>\n
Opinion articles in The Jakarta Post often share an angle on
\nIndonesian Islamic terrorism: It is not Indonesian and it is not
\nIslamic. Karen Armstrong's article Blame the politics, not the
\nreligion of Islam(The Jakarta Post, July 13), offers a similar
\nview of international Islamic terrorism.<\/p>\n
This heads off the obvious question \"what is wrong with
\nIslam?\", but results in questionable arguments. For example, she
\nsays the term \"Wahhabi terrorism\" is inadmissible because most
\nWahhabis do not commit acts of terror. In fact, it would be right
\nto refer to \"Wahhabi terrorists\" if they were motivated by
\nWahhabi ideology, regardless of whether terrorists were a
\nmajority of the Wahhabi community.<\/p>\n
According to her we should not use the term \"Islamic
\nterrorism\" because terrorism is not caused by Islam itself, and
\neven if it is, calling it so makes Muslims more likely to become
\nterrorists.<\/p>\n
That Islam does not cause terrorism is true in that religions
\ndo not act. Ideas exist in the minds of men and women. Whether
\nthey are dangerous depends on what men and women do as a result
\nof them.<\/p>\n
The essential idea of Islam is that there is a right way to
\nserve God, which is to follow the rules of Prophet Mohammad. Now
\nin truth there might be many ways to serve God, or there might be
\nno God at all. But in the eyes of Muslims, people who believe
\nsuch things are on the wrong track, or are wandering in the
\nspiritual desert.<\/p>\n
This idea creates at least two clear dangers. First, the laws
\nof Mohammad are designed for Arabian society 1,400 years ago.
\nMuslims may fail to adapt them to the modern world. The result in
\nMuslim-governed nations will be social tension and economic
\nstagnation. In non-Islamic states the result will be difficulty
\nintegrating with the rest of society.<\/p>\n
Second, Muslim governments may be undemocratic. If the law of
\nthe Koran is the law of God, it is risky to consult the people,
\nin case their will contradicts the Koran. The result is the
\nexclusion of anyone other than devout Muslims from the governing
\nprocess and intolerance of dissent.<\/p>\n
Many Muslims avoid these dangers, adapt to the modern world
\nand tolerate non-Muslims. For example, they may say \"I am not
\ndancing for religious reasons, but other people are welcome to
\ndance if they want to.\" Other Muslims, such as those in the
\ngovernment of Indonesia, may say \"We are not dancing so nobody is
\nallowed to dance for a month as a mark of respect for us.\" Their
\nconcept of tolerance is that non-Muslims must do the same as
\nthem, but they must never do the same as non-Muslims.<\/p>\n
A literal and intolerant interpretation of the Koran as God-
\ngiven is the basic ideology for fundamentalist terrorists. They
\nresort to violence when they cannot impose their version of
\nIslamic law through political channels. Muslims who follow a
\npragmatic and tolerant version of Islam may wish that the
\nextremist branch would wither and die. But this does not alter
\nthe fact that they come from the same root.<\/p>\n
JOHN HARGREAVES
\nJakarta<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/terrorism-and-terrorists-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}