Putting the terrorists out of business

Ahmad Syafii Maarif, Chairman, Muhammadiyah, Jakarta

Few realize that a new Islamic civilization will remain a utopia if the Muslims have not changed its attitude towards a positive, creative, and dynamic one in coping with the world marked by rapid change.

When such problems are matched with the unfortunate place of Islam in the psychological realm of the West, the seeds for misunderstandings and mutual opposition would continue to bloom. Islam is still, and increasingly so following Sept. 11, primarily framed in terms such as militant Islam, fundamentalist Islam, Islamic bombs, Islamic fanatics, or Islamic terrorism.

Despite unlimited access to information facilitated by the revolution in information technology, Islam strangely remains largely unknown to the West, even among educated minds.

The unfortunate remarks by Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi, who claimed Western civilization far more superior than that of Islam, clearly demonstrate the magnitude of this problem.

As a scholar has aptly noted, "Today we are witnessing the creation of a new myth. The impeding confrontation between Islam and the West is presented as part of an historical pattern of Muslim belligerency and aggression."

Indeed, the growing disenfranchisement, resentment, and despair among some Muslims and the continuing reluctance to learning and understanding more about Islam in some quarters in the West proves to be mutually reinforcing in a negative way. It is like adding the dry grass to the fire.

The resurgence of Islamic movements in many parts of the Muslim world should be understood within this context. Indeed, it has been pointed out that the basic concerns of past Muslim leaders and thinkers -- such as Abu A'la Maududi and Muhammad Iqbal in Pakistan, Muhammad Abduh and Hassan Al-Bana in Egypt, and Ali Shariati in Iran -- "were how to solve the pervasive sense of disenfranchisement that engulfed ordinary Muslims as they grappled with the forces of change."

Such concerns remain at the core of the struggle for justice. It is also the concern of millions of Muslims in Southeast Asia, especially in Indonesia.

In Indonesia, when the economy collapsed, more than 45 million were forced to live under the poverty line, not to mention tens of million others lived just on the poverty line.

Uneven economic development, and the inability of the state to cope with negative effects of globalization, has set the context for the radicalization.

Greater attention to religious radicalism in Indonesia began when a few hundred people, under the banner of Islam, took to the streets amid the impeding America's plan to attack Afghanistan, a poor country accused of harboring terrorists.

It is important not to equate "radicalism" with "terrorism." While the former refers to a set of attitude and ways to express it, the latter clearly embraces criminal acts for political purposes. Radicalism may or may not turn into terrorism. Radicalism is an intra-religious problem that should be dealt with by the Muslim community itself.

Terrorism is a global phenomenon that requires a global effort to combat it. And, such efforts should not be linked to any religion. Terrorism is simply a despicable criminal act, committed by evil people against humanity.

Muhammadiyah, the second largest Muslim organization in Indonesia, has set for itself the task of revealing the real face of Islam and its adherents in Indonesia as the most populous Muslim country in the world. Radical and extremist Islam is a small minority within the entire Muslim population numbering 190 millions adherents.

It is also equally important, however, to understand why radicalism emerged in Indonesia and elsewhere. In Indonesia, most of those people are energetic and impatient youth who no longer trust the corrupt government system and impotent legal and security apparatus.

They are also sick of hypocrisy among political leaders. They want instant change and abrupt action to stop any irregularities in society. The attacks by these groups on gambling houses and entertainment centers clearly reflect a degree of moral concern in the absence of strict law enforcement by the state.

A common thread among most these groups is that they are reactions to contemporary social and economic problems. They, however, do not equip themselves with intellectual instruments to articulate their ideas in a civil way.

Their actions might appear fruitful but certainly not in the long-term. Militancy is always dangerous as it always views things through black and white lenses. Moreover, such radical and militant actions could harm the image of Islam as a peace-loving religion that preaches tolerance and civil ways of solving problems.

For Muslims the world over, the issue is not whether Islam should oppose globalization or accept it. The real issue is how to manage globalization so that its positive aspects can be maximized and the negative ones minimized.

Yusuf Qardhawi, a leading Muslim scholar, has noted that Islam should take a middle way -- taking the positive sides of globalization, and leaving its negative ones.

The failed development policies of the pro-globalization regimes, endemic corruption, structural poverty, bad governance and crisis of legitimacy serve as the root cause for the growth of radicalism among the urban and lower classes.

As challenges confronting both the Islamic community and the West are rapidly becoming more complex due to globalization, both sides must initiate a joint effort to search for the pathways.

A number of points need to be stressed. First, this endeavor requires a strong political will on both sides to see the merits of constructive engagement with each other in order to forge a cooperative peaceful co-existence.

That would require harder work to establish mutual understanding and mutual respect, through a reinterpretation of history of relationship between the two. History has been too often used and abused to sustain mutual suspicion and enmity on both sides.

Second, Islam and the West should begin to work harder together to address globalization. Both parties should eliminate injustice, poverty, prejudices, discrimination, and all forms of evil acts.

Of course, there are those who do not believe in dialog. In the West, the resistance to dialog is clearly exemplified in such remarks that claims "the West will continue to conquer peoples, even if it means a confrontation with another civilization, Islam, firmly entrenched where it was 1,400 years ago." And as Yusuf Qhardhawi has admitted, "there are Muslim extremists who claim that there are no common ground between us and Christians and Jews."

Third, a world of different streams of culture and civilizations should not, and need not, be resisted. Plurality, and civil ways in managing differences within that plurality, would demonstrate the true meaning of civilization. Difference is to be celebrated as the object of creation itself.

Four, a better and more fruitful way towards the future lies in the willingness of both Islam and the West to move beyond the current impasse in their understanding of each other.

It is no longer enough to decry what one is against. The time has come to craft specific and concrete plans to build a bridge between the Muslim world and the West.

The West and the Rest should move beyond their preoccupation with the notion of Islam as a "threat" or "terror" and be prepared to see and understand Islam with all its complexity and plurality.

As Edward Said has said, "demonization of the Other is not a sufficient basis for any kind of decent politics, certainly not now when the roots of terror in injustice can be addressed, and the terrorists isolated, deterred or put out of business."

The above is an excerpt of the writer's address to the Trilateral Commission Meeting in Washington, D.C. which took place on April 5 to April 8.