After the detection of four suspects, out of five, involved in the recent terrorist attacks in France, authorities recognized that they are Muslim Frenchmen of Arab descent. The most important and dangerous connotation about this is that terrorist organizations, in the West, have succeeded at polarizing new generations of Western Muslims. This fact threatens to drag thousands of Muslims in these countries into serious troubles, if there is no conscious distinction between Islam and extremist ideologies.
A s a Muslim leader in France comments saying that the repercussions of recent attacks would be disastrous for French Muslims of Arab descent, he also states that this “is the result of the failure of politicians, religious scholars, and heads of associations to reject the ideological religious discourse that sanctifies terror and violence”. This “message” is one of the important lessons learned from the terrorist attacks that shook several countries in the recent period; from the Russian plane bombing over the Egyptian Sinai up to the attacks in France.
Whether the real actor in the recent terrorist attacks is a single organization or several ones, there is only one responsibility. This responsibility is partly located on politicians and undecided decision-makers in the fight against terrorism, or those who take it as a cover to achieve political objectives and as a tool in the international conflict and relations. The other part of this responsibility falls on “moderate” Muslims and specifically religious scholars responsible for the dissemination of proper understanding of Islamic religion.
I have written about the responsibility of the moderates, and I have warned of the danger of their silence and neutrality that serve terrorist’s interest. It is obvious that moderates and religious institutions in the Arab and Islamic world do not perform their appropriate role in this fateful battle to defend Muslims and Islam itself. These institutions often condemn every terrorist crime and seem to be infected by the political action, on the Arab and international levels, which always takes a “reactive” position. None of these institutions have stepped forward to take the initiative or even a “pre-emptive action”
To be fair before God and history, we must as Muslims reconsider ourselves in order to discover where the problem is and fix it, and to realize the gaps and fill them. For the sake of objectivity, it is required to confess that “most” efforts being made to raise awareness levels against terrorism are in vain. In fact, ISIS’s ideas are wide spread in the cyberspace.
I do not mean to blame moderates to take all the responsibility for the spread of extremism; this is not true at all. Rather, it was possible that moderates would have provided contributions to reduce the spread of this phenomenon if they have taken the initiative and provided a different intellectual model capable to confront extremism. Thus, such a model will gain the trust of the youth and disseminate awareness that development in the Arab and Muslim world and facing social exclusion in the West cannot not be achieved by the killing of innocent people; this rather will distort the image of Islam and make it involved in crimes it has nothing to do with. The name of Islam is far more pure to be written on bloodied flags and arms rose against civilians and innocents.
Let’s take the concept of “jihad” as an example to talk about intended efforts of moderate religious institutions in the Arab and Islamic worlds. This religious concept was left open to the public and to the ignorant, and also to all those who came across a book, either understanding it or not, to give interpretation and clarification of the term. Doctrinal views and the circumstances were given as well in the light of what is known as jurisprudence of reality. Hence, this caused a vast amount of messing with this religious concept, and deformed interpretation of many other concepts, conversations and Quranic verses. Therefore, quasi-scientists and extremists drifted to this misconception, which led to our disastrous situation in every sense of the word.
I have asked, in a previous article, a question to which I didn’t get any response: Are the moderates aware about the effects of their negative attitude? Are they sure that failure is not an option in the struggle against extremism and terrorism?!
Here I quote Martin Luther King’s saying in which he said, “The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict”. I may not agree with this argument from the religious side related with heaven and hell, sinner and innocent, only God can judge this on the resurrection day. However, in this life we must decide right according to mental and intellectual abilities Almighty Lord has provided us. I mean here to refer to the risk of neutrality in crises; everyone depends on everyone, but there is a kind of languor and search for individual interests in a battle concerning the future of the entire nation. The result was, and will remain, sliding into a state of negativity, neutrality and total silence, or other noises without clear plans or aware strategies carefully drawn to have results and impacts to fix mistakes and correct the course of events.
I am fully aware that the concept of moderation is ambiguous, in the sense that there are questions about what it means and what distinguishes moderate from extremist. whether moderation is assigned only to official religious institutions or there are other moderates, and what institutional framework should orient the movements of moderates. Then who is supposed to determine this framework in order to omit repetition, randomness and lack of planning?
These are serious questions that must be given answers in order to work hard on the intellectual level to face terrorism. It may be unfortunate that terrorist organizations are operating with highly developed Media, more effectively than many of the official religious institutions! ISIS, for instance, has effective communication platforms that outweigh most, if not all, official religious institutions!
My words may drive some people angry. But the randomness we witness in countering terrorism at the intellectual level is worth to be considered in order to stand for our religion and the security and stability in the Arab and Islamic world. There would be no success of any security and military efforts unless they are paralleled to an intellectual effort to bring down the sources of terrorism. The situation calls for the correction of the path and the refinement of the religious discourse.
