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.