Radicalism, a reaction to West's failures

Radicalism, a reaction to West's failures

Bali was again rocked by a terrorist attack on Oct. 1.
Twenty-three people were killed and 134 others injured. Blame is
being directed at radical Islamic groups. Nur Syam, professor of
religious sociology at the Sunan Ampel State Institute for
Islamic Studies (IAIN), Surabaya, discussed the issue with The
Jakarta Post's ID Nugroho last week.

Question: How should we view radical Islamic movements?

Answer: We should understand that radicalism or fundamentalism
is not only practiced by Muslims. There are radical and
fundamentalist elements among Christians, Hindus, Judaists and
Buddhists too. Radicalism and fundamentalism are a result of
coercion imposed by one group against another.

What about radical Islamic movements themselves?

Basically, Islamic radicalism and fundamentalism constitute a
social construction of religious perception set up by certain
groups. Such groups consider what they practice as in accordance
with what is required by Islam. This understanding positions some
social realities like modernization, secularization and
everything coming from the west as a deviation.

Does this understanding prompt radical Muslims to commit
terrorist acts?

Who has constructed radical Muslims as perpetrators of
terrorist actions in various parts of the world? Before dealing
with this, we should analyze why radicalism arises.

First, radicalism exists because of political oppression by
those in power. Remember how the New Order crushed the Islamic
Jihad Command movement in the 1980s, and arrested many Islamic
figures.

Second, secular regimes fail in formulating social policies
throughout the world, which increases criminality. Amid the
disenchantment, the idea of Islam as an alternative arises. Islam
is seen as capable of strictly carrying out amar ma'ruf nahi
munkar (practicing what is right and rejecting what is wrong).
And finally it is a response to whatever is brought by the
"western world". Everything brought by the west is regarded as
undermining Islamic values. There emerges the desire to return to
the concept of life fashioned by Islam known as al-salaf al-
salih.

So the three factors have led to radical Islamic movements and
eventually terrorist actions?

Not quite so. The resistance to western hegemony has induced
the birth of the western view that Islam reserves a fundamental
force that may at any time shock the world and disrupt the world
order arranged by the west. This stereotype that equates
fundamentalism with violence is perpetuated by the west. It was
more pronounced when attacks on the WTC, New York, the
underground in London and other acts of terrorism occurred.

Then is it right to equate radical Islam with terrorism?

Not exactly. The terms radical and fundamentalist as often
linked with terrorism have appeared following President George
Bush's declaration of a war on terror. In fact, the terrorist
actions launched by those claiming to defend "Islam" should be
examined on a case by case basis. As we observe, the cause of
such actions is the presence of a disparity where there are no
means of "confrontation" due to the lack of power. So, a "force"
ensues and manifests itself as a concrete movement. The
appearance of religious groups with such a connotation of
"violence" is basically a social response to politically loaded
western policies.

And the aspect of humanity is just ignored?

Speaking of humanity, one should also take account of the loss
of life and non-physical losses inflicted by western nations'
violence on Muslims in different regions. Cases of Muslims in
Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries serve as historical
evidence of western cruelty disguised in the defense of human
rights. There is a simple reason in the logic of the oppressed
that committing the same violence is something they have to do
amid the uncertainties of life. That's why the Palestinians had
such unusual courage in fighting against well armed Israeli
troops with slingshots or suicide bombs.

Won't it tarnish Islam as a religion of deliverance?

The terrorist actions committed by a group while uttering
Allahuakbar (God is Great) has other implications, one of which
is the assumption that Islam is related to terrorism. In fact,
terrorist acts are separate from religion. The two will never
meet because their ultimate goals are different. The aim of
deliverance must continue to apply methods and paths of
salvation. If terror is not the path of deliverance, it is
definitely not related to religion.

In Indonesia, terrorist attacks have repeatedly occurred. What
is your comment on this?

In Indonesia, the religious mainstream is represented by
moderate Islam through Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah,
Nahdlatul Waton, Jam'iyah Washliyah and others. Those in the
radical category have a small membership concentrated in the
cities. Most of them comprise of youths in the process of a quest
for religious insight. In this process they discover traditions
with "hard" and exclusive religious outlooks, which force them to
practice religious acts that are opposed to deliverance and
peace.