Constructing The Muslim Enemy From The Crusades To 9 11

Dr. Deepa Kumar is an Associate Professor of Media Studies and Middle Eastern Studies at Rutgers University. Her work is driven by an active engagement with the key issues that characterize our era -- neoliberalism and imperialism. She has been active in various social movements for peace and justice and has written numerous articles in both scholarly journals and alternative media.

Kumar's first book, Outside the Box: Corporate Media, Globalization and the UPS Strike, is about the power of collective struggle in effectively challenging the priorities of neoliberalism. Her second book titled Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, looks at how the "Muslim enemy" has historically been mobilized to suit the goals of empire.

Kumar began her research into the politics of empire shortly after the tumultuous events of 9/11. She is currently working on a third book on the discourses of terrorism within the mainstream media and in the political sphere in the US. 

Hosted by the Center for Asian American Studies with generous support from the Office of the President, the Department of English, Division of Diversity and Community Engagement, Middle Eastern Studies and the South Asia Institute.

لعبة الكلمات

Introduction



Word Play: لعبة الكلمات

الوحش الذي استيقظ فينا

By فهمي هويدي

أحذر من الوحش الذى استيقظ فينا، لأننا إذا لم نسارع إلى كبح جماحه فلن يسلم أحد من شروره، وستصبح مصر كلها ضحية له.

(1)

أتحدث عن خطاب الكراهية ودعوات الانتقام التي تستهدف ترويع الآخرين وتصفيتهم ليس لإقصائهم فحسب، ولكن أيضا لاقتلاعهم وحرمانهم من حقهم في الكرامة فضلا عن الحياة والوجود،

 إلى غير ذلك من عناوين ومفردات حملة الجنون التي باتت تملأ الفضاء المصري، وصارت تستخلص من الناس أسوأ وأتعس ما فيهم.
أتحدث عن التهليل لاستخدام القوة وعدم الاكتراث بالمجازر التي وقعت

والاستخفاف بأرواح ودماء القتلى

والشماتة في الضحايا،

واستسهال التخوين

 والتوزيع المجاني لتهم الإرهاب والتحريض على القتل وقلب نظام الحكم والتخابر مع الأعداء.

وأستغرب أن يتم ذلك كله من خلال منابر عامة، سواء كانت صحفا سيارة أو قنوات وبرامج تلفزيونية،

كما يمارس من خلال سيل من البلاغات المقدمة إلى النيابة، من جانب المليشيات الجديدة التي خرجت من المخابئ والجحور وصارت تستهدف كل ما هو سوي ومحترم في بر مصر، ولا تسأل عما هو نبيل وشريف.

في ظل هذه الأجواء المسمومة تحولت دعوات الوفاق الوطني والمصالحة والسلام الأهلي والالتزام بالتعددية واحترام الرأي الآخر والحل السلمي للخلافات السياسية،

تحولت كلها إلى مثالب يرمى بها من تجرأ وتطرق إليها،

 وأصبحت مبررات لشن حملات التجريح والتشويه.

بل إن الدعوة إلى المصالحة الوطنية التي هي من أنبل وأنجح أساليب العمل السياسي صارت تحظى بدرجة عالية من المقاومة والاستنكار،

وسيل الكتابات والحوارات التلفزيونية التي تبنت هذا الموقف يفوق الحصر.

بل إنني قرأت سبابا لأصحاب تلك الدعوة نشرته إحدى الصحف تحت عنوان

 "أبوكم لأبو المصالحة"!

والمقصود في الدارجة المصرية هو ملعون أبوكم وأبو المصالحة التي تتحدثون عنها.

أي أن الداعي إليها ليس مجرحا ومستهدفا بالهجاء فحسب، ولكنه ملعون الأبوين أيضا.

(2)

نقلت جريدة الأهرام يوم الأحد الماضي 25/8 عن المستشار الإعلامي لرئيس الجمهورية أحمد المسلماني قوله إن الكراهية في مجتمعنا خطر على الأمن القومي.

وهو تعبير دقيق ومهم رغم أن الجريدة لم تشر إلى السياق الذي وردت فيه، إلا أن صاحبنا لم يبين لنا

لماذا أطلقت حملة الكراهية في الوقت الراهن؟

 ومن يقف وراءها؟

ومن يتولى بثها والترويج لها؟ 
صحيح أن المنابر التي تتبنى تلك الحملة ليست فوق الشبهة

والوجوه التي تسوقها لها رصيدها المعتبر من عدم الاحترام وسوء السمعة،

 إلا أنه من المهم للغاية أن تسلط الأضواء على خلفية المشهد لكي نعرف بالضبط من صاحب المصلحة في بث تلك السموم وزرع الفتنة في المجتمع بما يؤدي إلى تمزيق أواصره وشل قدرته على النهوض فضلا عن التقدم،

 وذلك هو الهدف النهائي لأي خطر يهدد الأمن القومي لأي بلد.
إن الوحش في هذه الحالة لا يصيب الآخر فقط، ولكنه يسمم الأجواء ويلوث الإدراك العام، بحيث يحول المواطنين العاديين إلى وحوش صغار وقنابل موقوتة، مشحونة بالكراهية،

 الأمر الذي يقسم المجتمع إلى مليشيات متخاصمة ومستنفرة

ويحول الوطن الواحد إلى معسكرات متحاربة يتأهب كل منها للانقضاض على الآخر وإفنائه.

وما لا يقل خطورة عن ذلك أن استمرار ذلك الوضع يعد إعلانا عن فشل السلطة القائمة في الحفاظ على وحدة الجماعة الوطنية وعجزها عن حماية التنوع والتعدد فيها.

ثمة حلقة غامضة في خلفية إطلاق الوحش، ذلك أننا إذا فهمنا دور المنابر المستخدمة

وعرفنا شيئا عن المصالح المستهدفة،

وأدركنا حقيقة العناصر التي تغذي السموم وتروج للحقد والكراهية،

 فإن علاقة هؤلاء بالأجهزة الأمنية التي عادت إلى انتعاشها مؤخرا تظل محل تساؤل تردد كثيرا على شبكات التواصل الاجتماعي.

وقد أثار تلك الشكوك وقواها أن العناصر التي ترعى الوحش وتغذيه لها صلاتها التاريخية الثابتة بتلك الأجهزة.

وأهمية استجلاء هذه النقطة أنها تبين لنا ما إذا كانت عملية إطلاق الوحش جزءا من سياسة الدولة

أم أنها تتم لحساب جهات لها مصالحها الخاصة،

 أم أنها نقطة التقت عندها مصالح الطرفين.

(3)

ليس سرا أن الهدف النهائي لهذه الحملة هو

 القضاء على الإخوان والخلاص منهم بصورة نهائية عند الحد الأدنى،

 والخلاص من التيار الإسلامي في مجمله عند الحد الأقصى.

وهذا الهدف الكامن أعلنت عنه أصوات بلا حصر خلال الأسابيع الأخيرة،

 بعضها تسرع وذكر أن "الجماعة" انتهت بالفعل،

 وبعضها أكد أنها تلقت ضربة قاضية أخرجتها من التاريخ بغير رجعة،

وبعضها ذهب إلى أن المجتمع لفظها إلى الأبد،

 إلى غير ذلك من التعبيرات التي تحدث بها البعض عما يتمنونه وليس عما هو حاصل بالفعل.

صحيح أن الإخوان وقعوا في أخطاء عدة، وأن شعبية الحركة تراجعت إلى حد كبير فى مصر،

وصحيح أيضا أن أداء بعض الحركات الإسلامية في الفترة الماضية كان منفرا وليس جاذبا،

 لكن من الصحيح أيضا أنه على مدار التاريخ لم يحدث أن حركة عقائدية لها شعبية إسلامية أو غير إسلامية انتهت بقرار أو بإجراءات إدارية أو حملات أمنية من أي نوع.

وحين تكون الحركة إسلامية في بلد متدين بطبيعته مثل مصر فإن القضاء عليها واقتلاعها بالكامل يعد من رابع المستحيلات.

وهذا ليس رأيا خاصا، ولكنه رأي أي باحث منصف له علم بالسياسة أو بالاجتماع أو بالتاريخ.

وهو معنى عبرت عنه كتابات عدة في العديد من الصحف الغربية وفي بعض الصحف العربية والمصرية.

نعم قد تضعف الحركة وتندثر ومن ثم تختفي من الوجود، وهو ما يؤكده تاريخ الفرق عند المسلمين،

ولكن ذلك يتم من خلال تآكل الأفكار التدريجي أو تعارضها مع ثوابت الشرع أو فطرة الناس،

ولم يحدث مرة واحدة أن تم ذلك بقرار سلطاني أو بحملات قمعية وأمنية.

إن الجهد الهائل الذي نشهده هذه الأيام لشيطنة الإخوان لتبرير القضاء عليهم بما في ذلك الادعاء بأن الاشتباك معهم بمثابة حرب جديدة على الإرهاب،

 لو بذل عُشره لاحتوائهم وتشجيعهم على مراجعة أخطائهم وتصحيح علاقتهم مع المجتمع بمؤسساته المختلفة، لكان ذلك أجدى وأنجح وأقرب إلى تحقيق المصلحة العليا للبلد.

ناهيك عن سوء التقدير والتعبير في استخدام مصطلح الحرب على الإرهاب الذي أريد به دغدغة مشاع الغربيين.

ذلك أن الحرب الوهمية التي استخدمت نفس المصطلح في التجربة الأميركية كانت ولا تزال أفشل حروبها، ولم تحقق الهدف منها رغم مضي نحو عشر سنوات على انطلاقها، فضلا عن أن كثيرين يعتبرون أنها عممت الإرهاب في العالم ولم تقض عليه.

أدرى أن ثمة قائمة طويلة من الاتهامات للإخوان سواء في عهد الدكتور محمد مرسي أو بعد انقلاب 3 يوليو ينبغي أن تخضع وقائعها لتحقيق نزيه لكى يحاسب المسؤولون عنها.

ولا أعرف إن كان ذلك بات ممكنا الآن أم لا،

ثم إننا لم نسمع صوتهم فيما نسب إليهم من ادعاءات،

علما بأن كل ما تلقيناه حتى الآن ظل محصورا في التقارير الأمنية، التي على أساسها أجريت المحاكمات عبر وسائل الإعلام وعلقت المشانق في فضاءاتها.

(4)

على عكس ما يتصور كثيرون أو يتمنون، فالمشكلة بدأت ولم تنته، أو عند الحد الأدنى فإنها بصدد الدخول في منعطف جديد أشد خطرا.
ذلك أن ما جرى طوال شهر يوليو من الصعب نسيانه أو طي صفحته بسهولة.

ليس لدي ما أقوله عن حوادث التخريب التي وقعت، خصوصا حرق الكنائس واقتحام أقسام الشرطة، أو عمليات القتل والتعذيب التي تحدثت عنها وسائل الإعلام،

وقل ذلك عن أحداث الاتحادية وغيرها من النوازل التي حلت في عهد الدكتور مرسى،

 لأن تلك الوقائع لم يحقق ولم نعرف من الفاعل فيها،

وكل ما بين أيدينا الآن هو ادعاءات أمنية وأصداء إعلامية، تخدم سياسة الإقصاء والاجتثاث أكثر مما تخدم الحقيقة.

الوحش الذي استيقظ فينا كان أداؤه دمويا خلال شهر يوليو ، وتمثل في سلسلة من المجازر التي كانت حصيلتها ثلاثة آلاف قتيل وعشرة آلاف مصاب منهم سبعة آلاف إصابتهم خطرة وبعضهم على وشك الموت.

وهذه هي الأرقام التي سجلتها نقابة الأطباء، وعدّتها حدودا دنيا مرشحة للزيادة، لأن هناك قتلى ومصابين لم يتم التعرف على هوياتهم ولم تسجل بطاقاتهم.

وحسبما فهمت فهناك ضغوط أمنية على وزارة الصحة والمستشفيات لحجب المعلومات الخاصة بالقتلى والمصابين.

هذا الملف الدموي يخضع الآن لعملية توثيق قيل لي إنه حافل بالمعلومات الخطيرة والمفاجآت الصادمة، التي تحتاج بدورها إلى تحقيق نزيه يعرف الرأي العام بالمدى الذي وصل إليه الجنون وعبر عنه الوحش في تلك الفترة.

لا أتحدث عن محاسبة المسؤولين عن تلك المذابح، خصوصا أن ذلك ملف ملغوم يتعذر فتحه في الوقت الراهن، وإنما سيترك أمره للتاريخ عله يكون أكثر حيادا وإنصافا.

لكني أتحدث عن شلال الدماء التي تدفقت غزيرة خلال تلك الفترة.

بطبيعة الحال فإن أحدا لا يتمنى أن تطلق تلك الدماء جولة جديدة من العنف تدخلنا في جحيم الحالة الجزائرية وعشرية الموت السوداء التي خيمت هناك في تسعينيات القرن الماضي،

 لكن أحدا لا يستطيع أن يضمن أن ذلك لن يحدث وأن وحش القتل لن يولد لنا وحش الثأر، الذي أرجح أن يكون جنينا في الوقت الراهن.

المثير للدهشة أن ثمة تجاهلا لذلك الملف وإنكارا له، حيث لا أرى جهدا من أي نوع يبذل للتعاطي معه وتجنب تداعياته المخيفة التي تهدد السلم الأهلي، وتهدد الأمن القومي في نفس الوقت،

 الأمر الذي يسلمنا إلى مجهول يحفل بمختلف الشرور التي تخطر أو لا تخطر على البال.

لقد أعلن رسميا أن رئاسة الجمهورية سوف تشكل لجنة لتقصي حقائق ما جرى في مذبحة الحرس الجمهوري، ولكن اللجنة لم تر النور.

وفى خريطة الطريق التي أعلنها الفريق عبد الفتاح السيسي في 3/7 أعلن عن تشكيل لجنة عليا للمصالحة الوطنية من شخصيات بمصداقية وقبول لدى جميع النخب الوطنية وممثلة لمختلف التوجهات،

 ورغم مضي أكثر من خمسين يوما على ذلك الإعلان، فان اللجنة بدورها لم تر النور.

ليس عندي تفسير لتجاهل هذه المسألة،

وأرجو ألا يكون ذلك التجاهل راجعا إلى تنامي نفوذ تيار الاستئصال في دوائر السلطة الذي يعول على الحل الأمني وينحاز إلى الاقتلاع والإبادة.
وإلى أن تنجلى الحقيقة في هذا الشأن فإن الوحش سيظل يكبر ويزداد توحشا.

ولن تستغرب إذا استحضر وحوشا أخرى تملأ الغابة التي صرنا من سكانها.

The Sloganization Of Scripture

“Islam experts” find passages in the Qur’an that apparently justify extremism. 

One common problem in all such misreading of the Scriptures amounts to the “sloganization” of certain texts. This is done by taking a part of the holy text out of its textual and historical context, and turning it into a slogan that “justifies” a mundane political agenda. 

The crucial mistake is to overlook Islam’s scholarly tradition called “tafseer,” which is the study of the meaning of the Qur’an. Tafseer has a basic rule: A single verse or passage can’t be understood in itself. Instead, it has to be evaluated according to the other parts of the Qur’an, the general goals and principles of the holy text, and the way it was implemented by the prophet. Yet most radicals — be they Islamist or anti-Islamist — don’t have the time or the patience to “waste” on tafseer. They prefer to copy and paste the divine words to create powerful slogans for their immediate purposes.

For an example of sloganization, consider this Qur’anic verse, which is frequently quoted:

“O (Muslim) believers! Don’t make friends with the Jews or Christians” (5:51).

But then look at this verse, which puts the one above in context:

“(Muslims!) God does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you in religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. God loves those who are just. God merely forbids you from taking as friends those who have fought you in religion and driven you from your homes and who supported your expulsion. Any who take them as friends are wrongdoers” (60:8-9).

Via: "Notre Dame University"

US Media Helped Anti-Muslim Bodies Gain Influence, Distort Islam

Liat Clark writes:

A study published by a sociologist has revealed that fear-mongering non-governmental anti-Muslim organisations have been heavily influencing US media since 9/11, their messages seeping into news articles and television reporting and drawing their ethos from the fringes, straight into the mainstream.

What's perhaps most troubling about the results is how these minor groups, which would ordinarily receive little or no air time, have gained an element of respect that has led to them receiving more funding and coupling with influential bodies. Their influence is such that they have even been able to paint mainstream Muslim organisations as radical, says the study.

"The vast majority of organisations competing to shape public discourse about Islam after the September 11 attacks delivered pro-Muslim messages, yet my study shows that journalists were so captivated by a small group of fringe organisations that they came to be perceived as mainstream," the paper's author, University of North Carolina assistant professor of sociology Christopher Bail, told Wired.co.uk.

"Anti-Muslim fringe organisations dominated the mass media via displays of fear and anger. Institutional amplification of this emotional energy, I argue, created a gravitational pull or 'fringe effect' that realigned inter-organisational networks and altered the contours of mainstream discourse itself."

Bail and his team used plagiarism detection software to compare 1,084 press releases produced by 120 different organisations with more than 50,000 television transcripts and newspaper articles produced between 2001 and 2008. The software picked up damning similarities between the releases and stories from news outlets including the New York Times, USA Today, theWashington Times, CBS News, CNN and Fox News Channel.

"We learned the American media almost completely ignored public condemnations of terrorist events by prominent Muslim organisations in the United States," Bail told Wired.co.uk. "Inattention to these condemnations, combined with the emotional warnings of anti-fringe organisations, has created a very distorted representation of the community of advocacy organisations, think tanks, and religious groups competing to shape the representation of Islam in the American public sphere."

Bail told us that some of the organisations most successful in spreading negative warnings about Islam included the Centre for Security Policy (which, rather worryingly, has a former head of the CIA as an honorary co-chairman), the Middle East Forum (which claims to "protect the constitutional order from Middle Eastern threats" through projects such as its horrifyingly named "Islamist Watch" project) and Stop the Islamisation of America -- which needs no explanation.

"The only major US Muslim organisation that has achieved a high level of media influence is the Council on American Islamic Relations, which is now working to rebuff the recent rise in anti-Muslim messages within the American public sphere," said Bail.

Today, more than a decade since 9/11, evidence of that anti-Muslim influence still seeping into government habits is highly concerning.

"Muslim-American organisations have not been adequately represented within our policy process. For example, only one large Muslim-American organisation was invited to participate in recent Senate and Congressional hearings about the threat of radicalisation within the Muslim-American community."

The Homeland Security Committee event was chaired by US Representative for New York's third congressional district Peter King, who felt the need to refer to those Muslim-Americans present as "courageous" for attending -- perhaps a sign of the level of contention surrounding the issue.

Bail's paper, published in the American Sociological Review, is part of a wider study which will investigate how the influence of these fringe groups has spread beyond media and in to the real world, where doors have been opened to elite conservative social circles and conservative think tanks -- the first steps to influencing public policy and national opinion. Bail touched upon this in the current study after analysing publicly available information on the organisations' membership, which revealed troubling crossovers between fringe and mainstream organisations.

"In the US all not-for-profit or non-governmental organisations are required to file documentation that describes the names of people who are on their board. My research team collected these names and created a social network map that describes overlapping board membership among the organisations. This social network analysis enabled us to determine precisely which groups are connected to each other, and how these relationships evolved over time.

"They are now part of the mainstream… this media attention gave them visibility and enabled them to forge connections with mainstream conservative organisations such as the American Enterprise Institute."

The Institute is a high profile think tank with well-respected political and social scientists on its board. If groups that boast about projects such as Islamist Watch join forces with powerful, mainstream organisations such as the American Enterprise Institute, which may have access to huge funds, it represents an escalation that will be difficult, if not impossible, to counter.

Key moments beyond 9/11 served to speed up this acquired influence, says Bail, including the calls to burn the Qur'an by Pastor Terry Jones after it was announced an Islamic Centre would be built near to Ground Zero (Jones continues to burn the tome, despite pleas from both the World Evangelical Alliance and the Pentagon to stop) and, most recently, the anti-Muslim filmwhich instigated riots across the globe.

"While the people involved in these events were not affiliated with the groups I studied, I believe the steady rise of anti-Muslim discourse within the American public sphere laid the groundwork for these radical groups."

It's perhaps not all that surprising that fringe, anti-Muslim organisations have been getting some extra air time post-9/11. Their buzzwords and quotes can of course generally be ignored as simply one facet of a much larger discource -- however, what's particularly worrying is the total lack of balanced reporting the study has revealed. Not only that, where news outlets heeded anti-Muslim press releases, they were often quoted verbatim in parts.

"I think most Americans are exposed to anti-Muslim messages in the media and elsewhere. The danger, I believe, is that many Americans have not been exposed to the positive messages of moderate Muslim organisations because they receive so little media coverage. Perhaps because of this distorted representation, we have seen a recent increase in anti-Muslim attitudes within the United States -- even though anti-Muslim attitudes briefly decreased after the September 11 attacks."

Despite the dire picture the findings paints, Bail is a believer that tolerance will win out in a country with such religious zeal that atheists are considered the most distrusted minority group (according to a recent University of Minnesota study).

"It seems most Americans believe that diversity is fine, as long as every one shares a common 'core' of values that make them trustworthy -- and in America, that core has historically been religious," said sociologist Penny Edgell, an author on the Minnesota study. Respondents associated atheism with criminal behaviour, materialism and cultural elitism.

"I do not think it is too late," Bail told Wired.co.uk. "Religious tolerance is deeply embedded within our national character. Muslims have been a positive force in United States history since the 19th century. Before the September 11 attacks, Muslims might have been described as a 'model minority' with above average levels of education and income. They were so inconspicuous that they were routinely confused with Latinos. Needless to say, the September 11 attacks changed everything. Yet although my study shows this event enabled the meteoric rise of anti-Muslim fringe groups, it has also strengthened inter-faith coalitions working to invert the violent stigma attached to Islam."

Despite Bail's light touch of optimism, it is worth noting that he is working on a book which will detail how anti-Muslim fringe organisations have successfully branded mainstream Muslim organisations as radicals, and "achieved considerable influence upon US counter-terrorism policy and public opinion of Muslims more broadly" -- that's more than a little terrifying to consider.

Image: Shutterstock

Via: "Wired - UK"

The Mentality Of Demonising Muslims Is Thriving

Part-1




Part-2



More than 10 years ago, the 9/11 terrorist attacks left a gaping hole in New York - and across the US as a whole.

This open wound continues to divide communities to this day.

In this two-part documentary, Al Jazeera follows the stories of some of those caught up in the anti-terrorist crackdown that followed 9/11 as they speak out about the injustices they have endured and their fears of a rising Islamophobia in the US.

I was astounded then by a 2010 ABC News/ Washington Post poll that showed that 46 per cent of Americans said they held unfavourable attitudes towards Islam - compared with 24 per cent in January 2002 - and that more than half of the American population believes there are more violent extremists within Islam than in any other religion.

Alia Malek’s book, Patriotic Acts : Narratives of Post-9/11 Injustices , showed how thousands of individuals in the US have been needlessly swept up in the 'war on terror' and subjected to human and civil rights abuses, from rendition and torture to workplace discrimination, FBI surveillance and harassment. The personal stories in this book made me realise that Islamophobia is a wide phenomenon permeating American society. And this is what I attempt to show in my film.

A report by the Center for American Progress called Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America shows how a small group of self-proclaimed experts, backed by a host of donors, is spreading fear and hostility toward Muslims in the US.

These so-called experts market Islamophobia in books, reports, websites, blogs and carefully crafted anti-Islam propaganda. They talk to the media and advise Congress. The group has links with the extreme right-wing of Europe (Stop Islamisation of Europe) and has created a sister organisation in the US (Stop Islamization of America).
Norwegian murderer Anders Behring Breivik cited these "experts" in his "Manifesto" more than 200 times.

Making this film has brought me into contact with Americans who have been discriminated against because of their religion, but it has also brought me into contact with Americans who are fighting for justice and who want their country to live up to the ideals of their forefathers in which people of all religions, all colours and all ethnicities can live together in a melting pot where each will live with dignity and where human rights are respected.

Beware Of The Islamist Trap

By Monte Palmer,
Courtesy Of "Asia Times Online"

Islamists, judging by the use of the term in the global press, is a simplified way of referring to all Muslim groups seeking some form of Islamic rule in the Middle East. 

Like most simplistic expressions, "Islamist," is laden with hidden traps. 

The first Islamist trap is believing that all Muslim groups seeking some form of Islamic rule in the Middle East are of one mind and body. They are not. 

The second Islamist trap is assuming that all groups seeking some form of Islamist rule are inherently hostile to the interests of the United States and its allies. Some are, and some are not. 

The third Islamist trap is thinking that the US and its allies can stop the Islamist surge now sweeping the Middle East by diplomacy, sanctions, and covert action. The verdict on this supposition has yet to be rendered, but the outlook is not promising. 

The fourth and most lethal Islamist trap is the belief that force alone can stop the Islamists. Iraq and Afghanistan suggest otherwise. 

The dangers of assuming that all Islamists are the same is easily illustrated by a brief review of the four main Sunni Islamist currents competing for control of the Middle East. 

Islam Lite 

The most liberal of the four main Islamist currents is Islam Lite, the sarcastic Turkish nickname for the Justice and Development Party that has ruled Turkey within a secular framework for more than a decade. Islam Lite, the most forward looking of the four Islamic currents, has built Turkey into the world's seventeenth largest economy, consolidated Turkish democracy, brought Turkey to the doorstep of membership in the European Union, reaffirmed Turkey membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and established Turkey as the dominant Muslim power in the Middle East and beyond. 

At the regional and international levels, the Justice and Development Party's Islamic agenda includes support for Muslim Brotherhood rule in Egypt, Tunisia, and the Gaza Strip. It also calls for an independent Palestinian state in the Occupied Territories. All have soured Turkey's relations with Israel, but war between the two former allies is not in the picture. 

Partnership with the US and EU is an essential component of Islam Lite. Subservience is not.

... the Islamic Lite model practiced in Turkey does demonstrate that moderate Islamic rule is compatible with democracy and development. Much like Turkey itself, the Justice and Development Party provides an avenue for cooperation and dialogue between the West and Muslim currents throughout the Middle East. 

The Muslim Brotherhood

... the world's largest and most powerful Islamic organization. The Brotherhood now rules in Egypt and Tunisia and exercises profound influence throughout the region. The name may differ from place to place, but they are all Brotherhood offshoots. 

The odds are that it will control most of the Arab Middle East by the end of the decade. 

The foundation of the Brotherhood's success is a vision of Islam that promises Islamic morality, modernity, welfare, honesty, capitalism, stability, and development in a single and seductive package. It is this seductive package that has enabled the Brotherhood to capture the center of the Sunni Islamic community. 

Popular support, in turn, is bolstered by an organizational structure that spans the globe... the Muslim Brotherhood is first and foremost a Muslim organization that places Islam above nationalism. Egypt is the headquarters of the Brotherhood, but its goal is a Middle East dominated by moderate Muslim rule. Brotherhood dominance in one country is used to strengthen Brotherhood influence in others.

In sum, the Brotherhood possesses a forward looking agenda that includes democracy and development within an Islamic framework. The Brotherhood is willing to cooperate with the US and the EU, but only on terms that advance its Islamic agenda. 

The Brotherhood, in common with the Islamic Lite model, pursues its Islamic agenda in a patient and pragmatic manner that avoids violence if possible. 

Salafis 

The salafis are exceptionally conservative Muslims who believe that the Koran and Sunna (sayings and actions of the Prophet Mohammed) should be followed to the letter. This includes accepting the rule of tyrants as the will of God. God will judge the kings and tyrants when the time comes, but that is his call and not theirs. 

While dominant in the Gulf, diverse Salafi currents are emerging as a major force in Egypt and Tunisia, two of the most westernized countries in the Arab world. 

Jihadists

... the Jihadists differ from the mainline Salafis in three key ways. 

First, they have arrogated unto themselves the right to excommunicate Muslim leaders by declaring them to be kafirs or non-believers. Most salafis deem excommunication to be the right of God unless individuals denounce their belief in God and refuse to accept the Prophet Mohammed as his Messenger. 

Second, by excommunicating political leaders for their cooperation with the US, the jihadists are absolved from Koranic scriptures requiring them to support their ruling tyrants and kings. Rebellion and assassination await. 

Finally, it is not enough for the Jihadists to impose strict Islamic law on society. All Muslims societies, in their view, have been so corrupted by their association with the West that they must be totally destroyed and rebuilt in a purely Islamic framework. 

Traps and Consequences

The trap of viewing the main Islamist currents as a cohesive force deprives the West of much needed flexibility in dealing with the competing Islamic movements most likely to dominate the Middle East during the coming decade. 

The trap of viewing the main Islamists currents as being of one mind and body sets the stage for believing that all Islamist currents pose an imminent danger to the US and its allies. The battle lines for an inevitable conflict between Islam and the West have been drawn. Panic and islamophobia soar.

The drawing of battle lines, in turn, unleashes the trap of urgence. Something has to be done, but what? Iraq and Afghanistan have dulled the West's taste for drawn out guerilla wars. 

As former Secretary of Defense Gates framed the issue, "Any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army to Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should have his head examined." 

This sets the stage for an endless series of sanctions, covert actions, and drone strikes which stoke extremism, anti-Americanism and, eventually, a new explosion. 

If sanctions and covert actions don't work, the trap of assuming that the US can save the world from the Islamist threat by military force remains. I stress the US, because America's EU allies are bailing out, while Japan, China and Russia are pursuing Middle East agendas at odds with that of the US.

As the proverbial rhyme states:

"For want of a nail a shoe was lost.
For want of shoe a horse was lost.
For the want of a horse the rider was lost.
For the want of a rider a message was lost.
For the want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost."

For want of recognizing the complexities of Islamic currents, the Middle East could be lost. 

The Fallacy Of The Phrase, 'The Muslim World'

Western Media Reinforces Stereotypes By Reducing A Complex Set Of Causes To The Rage Into An Amorphous Mass.

On September 12, the day after the attacks on the US diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya, the New York Timesset out to explain what it called the "anguished relationship between the United States and the Muslim world". According to the Times, the "Muslim world" was prone to outbursts of violence, and the reaction to the 14-minute anti-Islam movie trailer The Innocence of Muslims was both baffling and predictable. "Once again, Muslims were furious," wrote reporter Robert F Worth, "and many in the West found themselves asking why Islam seems to routinely answer such desecrations with violence."

Other media outlets echoed the claim that "the Muslim world" was consumed by anger, and had long been so. TheAssociated Press offered a look back at "Five other incidents that inspired rage in the Muslim world", crediting over a billion people for the actions of a few thousand in their search for historical continuity. Others took a psychoanalytic approach. "Why is the Muslim world so easily offended?" asked Washington Post columnist Fouad Ajami. "Madness in the Muslim World: Help Me Understand," pleaded a blogger for the Houston Chronicle.

It is time to retire the phrase "the Muslim world" from the Western media. Using the phrase in the manner above disregards not only history and politics, but accurate reporting of contemporary events. The protests that took place around the world ranged in scale and intensity, in the participants' willingness to use violence, and in their rationales. The majority of the "Muslim world" did not participate in these protests, nor did all of the Muslims who protested the video advocate the bloodshed that took place in Libya.

By reducing a complex set of causes and conflicts to the rage of an amorphous mass, the Western media reinforce the very stereotype of a united, violent "Muslim world" that both the makers of the anti-Islam video and the Islamist instigators of the violence perpetuate.

Misleading Generalisations

Essentialist views of Islam and Muslims are nothing new. In Western media, Islam is often presented as a contagion, with Muslims as the afflicted, helpless to their own hostile impulses. What is different about the current crisis is that it comes in the aftermath of the "Arab Spring" - another series of intricate events depicted as interconnected and inevitable. Democracy would "spread" from one Muslim country to another, analysts argued, regardless of the unique historical trajectories of individual states. Some analysts went so far as to suggest it would spread to Central Asia, a region of largely isolationist dictatorships uninfluenced by Middle Eastern politics. The current protests are being portrayed as an "Arab Winter" - a simplistic reversal of a simplistic perception of success, with Muslims, undifferentiated, receiving the blame.

There is, of course, cohesion among Muslims, in the sense that there is cohesion among followers of any faith. The notion of the ummah is an essential part of Islamic doctrine. But the way the idea of "the Muslim world" is expressed within Islamic communities is different from the way it is expressed outside them. It is rare to hear the phrase "the Christian world" used in the English-language media, because doing so would generalise about the motives of over 2 billion people. No such respect applies to the world's 1.5 billion Muslims. Googling the phrase "the Christian world" yields 5.8 million results, while the phrase "the Muslim world" gives over 87 million results, many of them wondering what is "wrong" with the queried target. When the phrase "the Muslim world" is invoked, it is usually to reduce, denigrate or impugn.

The Western media's broad-stroke regionalism means that conflicts within individual Muslim-majority states become marginalised. Syrians posting on Twitter wondered how the world could give so much attention to a conflict that killed seven people while dozens of Syrians are killed by state security forces every day - documenting, as one commenternoted, their own demise in videos that receive far less attention than the bigoted pseudo-cinema of one American. Similarly, the violence at the diplomatic missions in Cairo and Benghazi was initially conflated, with "Muslim rage" being presented as a root cause for two distinct conflicts. The tendency to see "the Muslim world" as a problem in general means that specific problems within Muslim countries go unseen.


Dispelling Stereotypes

Soon after the destruction of the US embassy in Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans, a protest was held against the men who murdered them. Libyan citizens held English-language signs declaring "Benghazi is against terrorism" and "Sorry Americans this is not the behavior of our Islam and Profit [sic]". Photos of the protest, distributed by Libya Alhurra Livestream, went viral on Facebook and Twitter.

The Libyans protesting were aware that not only Libyans, but Muslims in general, would be blamed for the violence that took place, because the small group of Muslims who stormed the embassy would be seen as representative of all. They gave the rare apology that Western commentators often encourage Muslims to make on behalf of others who commit violence in the name of Islam. But while the sentiment of the protestors is appreciated by many Americans - and the photos likely assuaged some prejudices - such explanations should not be necessary. Ordinary people should not be assumed to share the beliefs of violent criminals who share their faith.

The Innocence of Muslims was made by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an Egyptian-American who hates Muslims. It was found on YouTube and put on Egyptian television by Sheikh Khaled Abdullah, a man trying to convince the world that Americans hate Muslims. This was a perfect storm of gross and deceitful parties depicting each other in the most vile terms, and then living up to each others' worst expectations.

The answer to such invective is not to reinforce it through media portrayals of "Muslims" as a collective. The media should instead pay more attention to individual states, conflicts and leaders, since dictatorship and factionalism have been as essential in shaping politics in Muslim-majority regions as has religion. The current crisis demonstrates how corrupt parties use religion as an incitement to violence and a means to political gain. The Western media should not play party to their prejudices.

Via: "Al-Jazeera"