Terrorism, religion and global politics

Terrorism, religion and global politics

Bob S. Hadiwinata, Head, International Relations Department, University of Parahyangan, Bandung

The suspects of the Bali bombings may indeed just be "dummy agents" sacrificed to protect greater powers, yet further investigation has reportedly led to an extreme religious group planning ruthless attacks on foreign targets in Indonesia.

No matter how quick the completion of the investigation, the debates on whether terrorism in Indonesia derives from Islamic militants or "American conspiracy" may continue.

Two things have emerged from the debate. First, a belief that terrorism has to do with religion, especially the radical followers of a particular religion. Second, a growing anti- American sentiment, especially among Muslims, following the war in Afghanistan and the growing tension in the Middle East. The U.S. policies in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq are seen to be part of "a Jewish-Christian" conspiracy against the Muslim world.

If terrorism is indeed related to religion, what seems to have served as the root causes of radicalism that leads to terrorist attacks deserves more serious attention.

In the early 1990s, at least 20 percent of some 50 known terrorist groups active throughout the world can be described as having a dominant religious motivation.

Religion and terrorism share a long history. Indeed, the main reference to terrorist acts are derived from the names of religious sects committing assaults to cause public disorder many centuries ago.

The word "zealot", for one, can be traced back to a millenarian religious sect who fought against the Roman occupation of what is now Israel between 66 AD to 73 AD. The zealots waged a ruthless campaign, employing a primitive form of chemical warfare: Poisoning wells and granaries used by the Romans and even sabotaging water supply.

Terrorism assumes a transcendental dimension, and its perpetrators are thus unconstrained by the moral, ethical or normative constraints. What is striking about religious or "holy" terror compared to purely "secular" terror is the radically different value system, mechanisms of legitimization and justification, and the world view that they seem to embrace.

Whereas secular terrorists generally consider indiscriminate violence immoral and counter-productive for their struggle, religious terrorists regard such violence not only as morally justified, but as a necessary means to achieve their goals. Here religion serves as a legitimizing force.

Consequently, religious terrorism face no moral constraints.

Yet although terrorist groups emerge within particular religious context such as The Real IRA (of the Irish Catholic republicans), yet no religion has ever taught their followers to commit terrorist acts. "To blame Islam for what happened in New York on Sept. 11, 2001 is like blaming Christianity for the troubles in Northern Ireland!" wrote the British scientist Richard Dawkins (The Guardian, Sept. 15, 2001).

The problem is therefore not with the religion itself, but more with radicalism growing in any religion.

The most common resort to violence occurs when a religious group feels threatened and thinks of itself as a chosen people. In extreme cases, militant leaders of this groups can demand their members to slaughter others in the name of deity.

Here religion often provides a cloak of respectability of terrorism. There are at least two dangerous signs of religious radicalism. First, the charismatic leaders who dominate followers spiritually and emotionally. Second, paranoia and demonization of outsiders, accompanied by intentional isolation within a cloistered community.

Sociologist Gustav Le Bon once argued that in every radical movement, there are always the "men of words" and "the men of actions". Using their charisma, the former convinces followers that their religion mandates acts of terror as sacred duty in an endless, cosmic struggle for the best way to please God. Nobody seems to care who or how many get killed in spiritual warfare.

Terrorist acts may also emerge from alienation that generates paranoia, often leading to demonization of outsiders or enemies. This occurs when conflicts come to be seen as "holy" wars where one side is upholding the forces of light (goodness) against the forces of darkness (evil).

One of most prominent regional conflict is probably the war between the Israelis and the Palestinians in the Middle Eastern region.

To many Muslims the superpower and its allies do too little to pressure Israel to end its atrocities against Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian settlers. They believe that the Western world has largely been unwilling to restore justice in the Middle East.

It is this political setting which seems to have give birth to the Jewish-Christian conspiracy theory -- to which many radical Muslims subscribe. Abu Bakar Ba'asyir, a Muslim cleric under police detention for his alleged involvement in a radical organization, argued: "Muslim clerics have agreed that both Jews and Christians are promoting a new Crusade" (Newsweek, Oct. 28).

The growing anti-American sentiment in most terrorist acts is also generated by the growing fear that the U.S. will lead the world into a scene of onrushing economic, technological and ecological forces that demand uniformity of values.

This uniformity seems to mesmerize people everywhere with fast music, trendy fashions, and fast food. This "McWorld" trend, Benjamin Barber writes, is a product of popular culture driven by expansionist commerce. Its template is American, which is quickly copied all over the world. It is about culture as commodity and apparel as ideology.

The imposing of this highly secular way of life has unfortunately taken religious norms and values to its toll. In being reduced to a choice between the market-driven universalism and a retribalizing politics of particularist identities, people around the world are threatened with an atavistic return to medieval politics, where local tribes or religious groups stood up to defend their identities.

In extreme cases, people will resort to religious identity to wage a total war against this universalism, to amplify their appeal and to obtain spiritual justification.

Here, McWorld appears to recreate and reinforce jihad. In its mildest form, jihad refers to religious (Islamic) struggles on behalf of faith; in its most extreme form, it could mean militant acts who make the slaughter of the "other" a higher duty.

While the disclosure of those behind the Bali bombing will bring much relief, it remains unclear whether terrorist acts motivated by religious reasons will cease to exist in Indonesia and elsewhere. As long as the "men of words" exist, terrorism with religious motives will continue to survive.

One or two perpetrators may be captured and severely punished, but new players, who share the same ideology and hatred against infidels, will soon take their place.