The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism

Amit #68 ``Islamic world `` There is no such thing. You would be more accurate if you referred to muslim fanatics. President Bush understood this when he made the clear distinction between the vast majority of muslims who are like normal people anywhere, and the islamic chauvinists. The result: He bashed the hell out of the taliban, and muslims across the world had no problem with it (and many, like myself, thank him for liberating Afghanistan from these evil people). This success has emboldened Musharaff as well, who now realizes that mullahs are a bunch of paper tigers and who recently talked about isolating these people from the rest of society. I had said as much on chowk last year when mullahs were at their height and I had said it would take a single battalion of disciplined soldiers to send these kalashnikov armed beareded thugs in Pakistan running for their lives.

Shammi # 25

Maulana Urstruly? No need to call me names. I forgive you this time because reading the whole article is enough punishment for you:)

Regarding your question on Fundamentalism and Colonial Education: It is absolutely imperative that we make the distinction between the concepts of fundamentalism and extremism if we want to further this argument.

Fundamentalism: In general, means reverting back to the origin of the ethics and morals. Redifining the realities of today in terms of our moral values. And establishing a base to face the challenges of tomorrow. It means taking charge of your own destiny and not letting external forces define your morality alone. It is a moral and ethical movement across the globe and it is not particular to Islam only. If you read Reason # 4, Prof Huntington`s thesis confirms it.

Extremism: on the other hand is an abberation, again not particular to religion only. You are well aware of the meaning of Extremism.

My thesis supports Fundamentalism and not Extremism. Before we further explore this topic plz let me know whether you were reffereing to Fundamentalism or Extremism.

re: goldsteen

``If you can not accept my name, how can you accept the existence of Israel. As for as we are concerned, to quote late Prime Minster Golda M, there is no Palestine problem. Only disgruntled Baduins who happen to be Muslims.``

...you don`t need some two cent pakistanis to accept the existence of Israel...Israel exists and will continue to exist...if for no other reason, then as the beacon of democracy and civilization in the middle-east...one which helps arabs move their calendar up from the 7th century...

...the jihadi terrorist attacks in jerusalem yesterday were yet another symptom of the mad mullah disease that also afflicts chechnya, kashmir, phillipines, east timor and new york...

i hope israel strikes back and strikes back hard...it always has in the past...i know israel doesn`t need india`s help, but india should (and probably already has) offer complete support and help...

Bhuttos are trouble. BB is in INDIA. she met Advani LK a hindu Sindhi homeminister of of india. Is it ok? to meet him? I am sure bb will do anything for power. breakig pak and riding sindhi jiye sindh type national sentimental. Why we allowed?. It is disturb, they renewed her passport in Dubai. WHY/WHY? WHY?. is general serious about catching her or like NS to make deal?Ruler shuld see that is not private business/ hope all expak comment on BBs travel india. thanks everybody

Poonawala: Yes, there are no Islamic or Hindu Civilizations at present. There was, though, once an Islamic Civilization which flourished in the middle east for 3-4 centuries and spread as far as Spain. Similarly there was and still valid Indian Civlization that lasted perhaps few thousands years. At present, the pillars of Indic Civilizations are pretty much in tact both in India and Pakistan, particularly in small towns and rural areas. The language, dresses, cuisine, way of life and relationships in Pakistan are all defined by actually Indic civilization rather than Islamic. It is an arguable point whether religion defines Pakistan more than Indiic civilization day-to-day life of an average Pakistani, leaving Indo-Pakistan politics aside. It did not change during the harshest of Islamic empire rule over India and is not likely to change any time soon. With the failure of Islamic ideology everywhere, even political Islam in Pakistan is vulnerable now. Besides with nukes who needs Islamic rhetoric for defence of Pakistani borders against any real or percieved enemies in the region.

In Pakistani Punjab, only success of Islam is really the lowering of the status of Punjabi language with practically no literature, magazines or newspapers in Punjabi and strong opposition to making Punjabi language the medium of education in schools. The right wingwers, the 2-nation theory lovers and Islamists mostly oppose promotion of Punjabi language althought hey do not directly say it: they say it indirectly by supporting Urdu or even Arabic while their own children prefer to learn English and end up getting green cards.

The harsh criticism of Samuel Huntington`s thesis is in line with general trend in Islamic world on concentrating on one strong individual who eother says and does everything right or an evil/ satan who does everything wrong. His book is more of a research book in the area of International Relations and like any R & D activity, it is the input and not the final product of a vast area of research. Those who do not believe and abhore pluralism jump on any reaserch work that does not fit with their model of world. Huntington`s work is a valid contribution from the points of view of the dynamics of understanding in a dynamic society. In static society, such modes of expression are heretical with books being buned and the author relegated to persona non grata. Relax y`all, Huntington is speaking his mind as a thinker/ expert of International Relations. There are many others with varying point of view.

Interesting and quite detailed research.

DESCRIBING THE WRONG CLASH



There cannot be a clash of civilizations, in the terms decribed by Huntington. The Islamic civilization will not go to war with the Western civilization. For the simple reason, the world is increasingly becoming too cosmopolitan to divide civlizations into such groups. There are more Muslims in India than in 53 of the 55 Muslim countries of the world. There are more Muslims in the USA (the number being between 1.5 to 7 million, depending on whether one believes the US Jewish organizations or Muslim organizations) than in many Muslim countries, like Jordan. There are more Muslims in Pakistan, than in most of the Arab countries combined. There are more Christians in India than in many European nations.

If one follows Alan Derschewitz`s book, within 70 years, due to intermarraiges with Christians, the number of Jews in the USA could reduce to well under 100,000. While Islam is the fastest growing religion of in the USA. If one believes the US TV show 60 minutes, the influence of Hasidic Jews in the Israeli society and govt. is becoming so strong, that any Israeli who can get a US Green card, is jumping on the opportunity. And despite pointing to Hitler as the sole anti-Semite, it was infact the whole German (and to some extent European) society that went after the Jews. That dislike still exists to some extent. France, now has such a sizable Muslim minority, that they barely joined the current coalition against Afghanistan. So on and so forth.

Needless to say, it is becoming more and more difficult to divide the world into Islamic and Western civilizations, and political outlooks. The lines between the Islamic and non-Islamic civilizations are too fuzzy, and the lines between the Islamic and Western civilizations are getting fuzzier by the day. For example, India has more 70 times as many Muslim as Palestine, and around 35 times as many Muslims as Jordan, yet it is putting in great efforts to form strong alliances with Israel. Will the, ``Western civilization`` be willing to go to war against the, ``Islamic civilization`` in fifty years, if their are 30 million voting Muslims in the USA and 1 million voting Jews?

There is however a clash going on, and this clash is getting bigger and bigger: It is the clash between a Jewish Israel (getting more and more fundamentalist due to the increasing political power of the orthodox Jews), and the Middle East Arabs (already quite fundamentalist). This includes Christian Arabs, as well (the chief spokeswomen of Arafat is a Christian lady named Hannan Ashrawi. And I belived Arafat`s wife is Christian, as well; for some reason, no one points out the Christian Arabs).

In an effort to increase their strengths, both these groups, have recruited other countries, based on what appeals to these countries. The Arabs have been brought into the battle militarily, on the Arab brotherhood card. The remaining Muslims, including Pakistani and Indian Muslims, have been brought into it emotionally, by the Muslim card. This is despite the fact that South Asian Muslims, on the whole, dislike or even hate Arabs, due to the open racism practiced by Arabs against South Asians.

The Israelis being severely outnumbered, have brought in the US, on their side. This has been done due to the extremely affluent pro-Israeli Jewish lobby in the US (if anyone doubts the intentions or power of this lobby, I suggest you interact with some of their groups; they place Israel interests far higher than US interests, even though their members are themselves Americans).

There are only 4.5 million Jews in Israel, and around 2 million Muslim Palestinians. However, this small group of 6.5 million people is the root of the biggest clash, in the world today. This clash is between the US (with a foreign policy hijacked by Israel) and the Muslims and Christians of Arab descent (not the whole Muslim world). These two groups, between themselves, actually have nothing against each other. They are, infact, quite dependent on each for oil and technology and investments, respectively. So without the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, these groups would be natural allies.

This whole scenario has gained a life of its own, and has grown much bigger than the Israel/Palestine conflict, that catalysed it. The Americans have started targeting the Arab countries, and the Arab countries` individuals have started targeting the Americans. Infact, more non-Palestinian innocent Arabs have been killed by the USA (hundreds of thousands in Iraq alone, during and after the Gulf War, according to UNESCO and the Ramsey report; that is one WTC a month for ten years). And more non-Israelis (Americans) have been killed by Arabs (around 5 thousand innocent Americans in the WTC, etc.).

The fact that hardly any non-Arab Muslims have been killed in this clash, and the fact that hardly any non-Israeli and non-American Western individuals are being killed in this conflict now (or even before), should be enough of an indication the actual clash is not one of civlizations. It is a clash of politics, with the US/Israel on one side (all other Western nations regularly vote against Isreal, in the UN), and the Arab countries, on the other, involved in a violent battle, that is getting larger and larger.

The more the pro-Isrealis can potray (primarily through the US media and the US political system) the whole Muslim world (and not just the Arab world) to be in a state of clash with the whole Western world (and not just against Isreal/USA), the more Western countries they can recruit on their side.

A good example of this is the initial attempt by Sharon to use the WTC tragedy as an excuse to invade Palestinian villages/cities. Another good example of this is the attempt of some US politicians to portray the WTC, as an act against the freedoms of, ``Western Civilization.`` They did point out that it was not an attack by Islam, but they did say it was against Western ideals. The former is true, i.e. it was not an attack by an Islamic civilization, however the later is false, i.e it was not an attack on Western civilization. It was infact a surgically targeted act against the USA. It is well-known that Arab terrorists live in Canada, Germany, etc. and plan their attacks against the US, in those countries. If these terrorists just wanted to target the, ``Western civilization``, they would not take the risk of entering specifically the US. They could just blow up places in Toronto and Hamburg.

Similarly, the more the anti-US Arab individuals can portray (primarily by inticing the frustrations of the economically poor in Muslim countries) this clash as one of the US against Islamic civilization (not just against the anti-Israel Arab countries), the stronger their positions becomes.

A good example of this is the continous additions of Muslim sufferings in the speeches made by Osama Bin Laden. I believe Kashmir was never included in the original speeches/causes of OBL. I only heard it in his last speech. It entered the equation, when he needed the support of the religious right of Pakistan. This is despite the fact that the APHC and the Pakistan govt. both completely considered the WTC attacks a terrorist act, and assisted the coalition against Al-Qaeda. Infact, the Pakistan govt. has always assisted the US in catching any terrorist, the US has been interested in catching. And the Indonesian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani govts. (by far, the three largest Muslim govts.) have never been involved in a clash with anyone in the, ``Western civilization,`` and have never assisted in killing a single individual of the, ``Western civilization.``

So, there is definitely a clash, but not of civilizations. It is political clash between Israel and Palestine, which has created off-shoot clashes, between the US and Arabs, which have become far larger than the original clash. Due to the cosmpolitan nature of the world, getting more and more cosmopolitan by the day, I doubt this political clash, will ever turn into a clash of civilizations, despite the efforts of certain individual Arabs, and the pro-Isreali nexus in Israel and the US.

Ironically, Isrealis and Palestinians are two of the most literate groups in the world. The Palestinians having, by far, the highest literacy rate amongst the Arabs, and I believe in the whole Muslim world. And Isreal has a 95% literacy rate, amongst the highest in the Western world.

Ah, that Quisling -- Qazi Husain Ahmed (with an inverted d)

````To a question that why his sons were not fighting along with the Taliban in Afghanistan when he could call other youths to join the ``jihad``, Qazi replied ``I have got my own jihad front. Even in the armed forces everybody is not supposed to hold a gun and go to the front line.``````

Good argument -- especially if that ``everybody`` happens to be SONS of an arm-chair Commander of the Faith with his “own jihad front”. -- from a distance.

Question: why is this shameless Jihadi not in jail for pushing other people`s sons into the Afghanistani meat grinder.

And after all that -- this unrepentant criminal has the audacity and face to demand the following:

````In supreme national interest, the unconstitutional regime of the self-proclaimed president, Pervez Musharraf, must bow before the national resolve and resign, the army must go back to the barracks, an interim national government should be formed and elections should be held,````

Amazing!

Hang him by the nearest lamp post -- as a foreign Talibani agent provocateur -- for deliberately and maliciously depriving -- so many Pakistani MOTHERS -- of their precious SONS -- while his own sons are having fun in Pakistan and in US.

Ras Siddiqui #42

THank you for your comments. My thesis is not about proving Huntingtons proposition right or wrong. It is about anlaysing whether the current conflict conforms to his ideas or not.

On another note, would you care to explain what is being ``monolithic``. Here is how Huntington defines a civilization; please explain objectively how you differ with his definition of civilization:

``What do we mean when we talk of a civilization? A civilization is a culturalentity. Villages, regions, ethnic groups, nationalities, religious groups, all have distinct cultures at different levels of cultural heterogeneity. The culture of a village in southern Italy may be different from that of a village in northern Italy, but both will share in a common Italian culture that distinguishes them from German villages. European communities, in turn, will share cultural features that distinguish them from Arab or Chinese communities. Arabs, Chinese and Westerners, however, are not part of any broader cultural entity. They constitute civilizations. A civilization is thus the highest cultural grouping of people and the broadest level of cultural identity people have short of that which distinguishes humans from other species. It is defined both by common objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs,institutions, and by the subjective self-identification of people. People have levels of identity: a resident of Rome may define himself with varying degrees of intensity as a Roman, an Italian, a Catholic, a Christian, a European, a Westerner. The civilization to which he belongs is the broadest level of identification with which he intensely identifies. People can and do redefine their identities and, as a result, the composition and boundaries of civilizations change. ``

SemiPreciousme # 66

Please check my # 34. Various interviews of OBL since early 90`s are available on the web. The link given at # 34 is a start.

Afaqui # 66

Thank you Sir. I know a Punjabi anecdote on the similar note but just cant recall it-aftaar is just one hour away and it is hard, so hard to think of anything other than pakoraas at this time. Meanwhile check this one.

Origin of word Miraasi:

Once upon a time in a village in Punjab a miraasan gives birth to a child. A nai (barbar) spreads the word. Many people in the village were found repeating the phrase ``miraa si?``, ``miraa si?``, ``miraa si?`` on that day. And the word Miraasi was thus originated.

(Caution: Extrapolating it as the 8 rider story is not allowed. It is cruel:))

Re: Yahooda Goldsteen

``...Today we have seen violence again in Jerusalem...``

It is a terrible incident, and I am shocked by the barbarity. The bombs were packed with nails to inflict maximum injuries, and to kill indiscriminately. Most victims were teenagers enjoying a Saturday night out on the town. A Palestinian waiter who worked in a nearby restaurant was sobbing in front of three bodies with their heads torn open (according to The Washington Post). These suicide bombers who kill leave their own families behind. Their hate for others exceeds their love for their own families. THAT is evil.

Re: Urstruly #87

You are right, and I was careless with the term `fundamentalist`. I should have used the word `extremism`, or `militant extremism`. I have no quarrel with fundamentalists, as long as they do not impinge on any one else`s rights and believe in `live and let live`. BTW, I used the honorific title `maulana` in jest, not to offend. If it caused offense, please accept my regrets.

Re: Ahmed Madani

Your posts are a joy to read, and they light up my day. You are worried about two Sindhis getting together in India (BB and Advani). You need not worry -- BB is still a Pakistan nationalist first, not a Sindhi nationalist. She would rather be PM of Pakistan, than CM of Sindh.

I deplore on humanitatian grounds the recent suicide bombing in Israel.

I deplore ISRAEL`s state sponsored terrorism and the destruction of the lives of the Palestinian people. It reminds me of what the Al Qaeeda ISI Pathan combination are doing in the indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.

The lives of Palestinians and Kashmiris are being toyed with by the 2 Theocracies of the 20th century, Israel and Pakistan.

Dr Poonawala

username #65,

blah blah blah....

you just wanted to pick a fight with me. i have a tendency in bringing it out in people, it must be my Punjabiyat.

what else is new...

Urstruly: This must be the only time Ive ever agreed with you...

Is the following an inaccurate premise? ``If someone is a humanitarian, s/he is opposed to all (explicit) human oppression.`` You will find that a lot of arabs are nationalists. I would take them slightly more seriously if they b1tched about Human rights violations in their own countries (rather then the continuous anti america/israeli rhetoric).

The muslim world is responsible for the state of the Muslim world. From the currupt politicians to the ignorant masses who beleive them, we share a lot of the blame for our poverty/ignorance etc.

Unfortunately, people look too hard for scapegoats. As if America`s destruction would rejuvenate us. There is a reason Eric Margolis keeps telling us that it was only the US that acted in chechnya. Where was the rest of the Muslim world? One should seriously question the idea that the Islamic world is one big happy family. Weve bought into the divide and conquer virus quite well.

Lastly, America is most definately looking for oil in afghanistan. Its fitting that they`re president is also an idiot (one would think he`d follow the advice of Carter and fund alternative energy plans... And the situation in Iraq is sickening (if uve seen pics of babies with burnt skin and grotesque deformities ud know what im saying).

But since when has GENOCIDE ever bother America?