Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Islam. Show all posts
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Important new book on jihad.
Marc Lynch reports here on Yusuf al-Qardawi's new book, Fiqh al Jihad or the Jurisprudence of Jihad, which refutes Al Qaeda's vision of jihad as a "mad declaration of war upon the world." (Lynch names Qardawi as "the most influential living Sunni Islamist figure"; he is the founder of Islamonline, host of Al Jazeera's Sharia and Life, and Chariman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars.)
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Injustice served: Marwa el Sherbini, Egyptian woman, stabbed in German Court. Why? And why isn't the backstory in the news?
Yet another stunning example of 'justice' Muslims receive in this world - inside or outside the Middle East, inside or outside courtrooms.
I can't believe the story of the Marwa el Sherbini, the Egyptian woman stabbed 18 times in a German court isn't getting more press, well I actually can believe it given how devoid main stream media is of actual news.
Marwa, 3 months pregnant, was murdered just after winning a verdict against a man who verbally assaulted her for wearing the veil. Her 3 year old son watched the murder, and her husband was shot while trying to save her.
Here is a summary of what happened and here is an analysis of the lack of press coverage , explaining why Marwa hasn't been in the news, and juxtaposing her death with that of Neda, the Iranian woman shot by Basij who became a symbol of the demonstrations. Here is Hicham Maged's, Egyptian blogger, analysis of the tragedy. In it he goes down the 'what if' path. What if, for example, it was a western woman stabbed by a Muslim 'extremist'? Maged continues his analysis here with a piece entitled "De-Stereotyping the Image". Here, Michael Collins Dunn, Editor of Middle East Journal and blogger extraordinaire, has a great compilation of reports from a variety of Egyptian and Arab news sources.
I can't believe the story of the Marwa el Sherbini, the Egyptian woman stabbed 18 times in a German court isn't getting more press, well I actually can believe it given how devoid main stream media is of actual news.
Marwa, 3 months pregnant, was murdered just after winning a verdict against a man who verbally assaulted her for wearing the veil. Her 3 year old son watched the murder, and her husband was shot while trying to save her.
Here is a summary of what happened and here is an analysis of the lack of press coverage , explaining why Marwa hasn't been in the news, and juxtaposing her death with that of Neda, the Iranian woman shot by Basij who became a symbol of the demonstrations. Here is Hicham Maged's, Egyptian blogger, analysis of the tragedy. In it he goes down the 'what if' path. What if, for example, it was a western woman stabbed by a Muslim 'extremist'? Maged continues his analysis here with a piece entitled "De-Stereotyping the Image". Here, Michael Collins Dunn, Editor of Middle East Journal and blogger extraordinaire, has a great compilation of reports from a variety of Egyptian and Arab news sources.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Obama and Islamists
From Wonk Room at Think Progress: Will Islamists be Part of the President's New Dialogue?
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Refutation of Quranic sanction of Ploygamy (really amazing piece)
Now I can go to sleep happy:
Amazingly well-evidenced refutation , by A Faizur Rahman, that polygamy is sanctioned in the Qur'an.
I am talking using evidence straight from the horses mouth:
"Even a simple reading of verses 4: 2, 3 and 127 will show that it was under such circumstances that the Quran allowed conditional polygyny, mainly to protect orphans and their mothers from an exploitative society.
Polygyny, which finds mention just once (4:3) in the Quran, is one of the most misunderstood concepts of Islamic law. It has been abused over the centuries by Muslim men without appreciating the spirit behind its exceptional sanction, which is clearly contextualised in the historical conditions of the time when a large number of women were widowed and children orphaned as Muslims suffered heavy casualties in defending the nascent Islamic community in Medina. Even a simple reading of verses 4: 2, 3 and 127 will show that it was under such circumstances that the Quran allowed conditional polygyny, mainly to protect orphans and their mothers from an exploitative society."
Please click on the link and read the rest!
Amazingly well-evidenced refutation , by A Faizur Rahman, that polygamy is sanctioned in the Qur'an.
I am talking using evidence straight from the horses mouth:
"Even a simple reading of verses 4: 2, 3 and 127 will show that it was under such circumstances that the Quran allowed conditional polygyny, mainly to protect orphans and their mothers from an exploitative society.
Polygyny, which finds mention just once (4:3) in the Quran, is one of the most misunderstood concepts of Islamic law. It has been abused over the centuries by Muslim men without appreciating the spirit behind its exceptional sanction, which is clearly contextualised in the historical conditions of the time when a large number of women were widowed and children orphaned as Muslims suffered heavy casualties in defending the nascent Islamic community in Medina. Even a simple reading of verses 4: 2, 3 and 127 will show that it was under such circumstances that the Quran allowed conditional polygyny, mainly to protect orphans and their mothers from an exploitative society."
Please click on the link and read the rest!
It's a bone picking week: Now Andrea has a bone to pick with me!
My brilliant friend Andrea had a bone to pick with me at dinner tonight. (She got your back Sabrina Tavernese...maybe, see comments.)
A usual, we went to the new Matchbox on Capitol Hill, drank our favorite Malbec Felino, I ordered an awesome pizza, while Andrea ordered one of sub-par value. One thing Andrea and i can be sure of when we go to M-box: neither of us will ever really ask for a slice of the other's pizza.
Andrea made an important point about my post, directly below, on militancy in Pakistan and its connection, or lack thereof, to Islamic schools.
Andrea and I are both people at all costs try to steer people away from the dangerous stereotype that Islam is a violent religion; that Arabs have a violent culture. However, she reminded me that sometimes, I might be too overprotective of Islam. I am used to defending it against relatives who think that Muhammad was a predator (my Uncle Billy - that's a whole different story for another day) and sometimes I need to let my guard down and admit that there of course, are issues with Islam. Heaves to Betsy, I don't want to sound like a stinkin apologist.
Most importantly, she reminded me that something about these Islamic schools is contributing to militancy:
The Qur'an, taken out of historical context, just like the old and new Testaments are violent books. Stories of battles and hatred are intertwined in stories of compassion and empathy. Manipulated and perverted by the 'right' kind of people - militants in Islamic school - they are all dangerous. (Ie the use of the Bible to justify Christian militancy and the Torah to justify that of violent Jewish settlers.)
Big Dre's (Andrea) important point el numero dos: The manner of teaching at these schools - the way, the pedagogy, or lack thereof (sorry to use this phrase twice), is problematic; it is indoctrination. These kids are taught to obey, to follow, to listen. They are not taught to question, to think critically, to evaluate. Anything the 'teacher' says, goes. And he has a gun, so, even if you don't believe him, you're eventually intimidated into doing so.
The Qur'an taken out of historical context (like all holy books) combined with the indoctrination style teaching a la Stalin or Mussolini are a recipe for disaster.
A usual, we went to the new Matchbox on Capitol Hill, drank our favorite Malbec Felino, I ordered an awesome pizza, while Andrea ordered one of sub-par value. One thing Andrea and i can be sure of when we go to M-box: neither of us will ever really ask for a slice of the other's pizza.
Andrea made an important point about my post, directly below, on militancy in Pakistan and its connection, or lack thereof, to Islamic schools.
Andrea and I are both people at all costs try to steer people away from the dangerous stereotype that Islam is a violent religion; that Arabs have a violent culture. However, she reminded me that sometimes, I might be too overprotective of Islam. I am used to defending it against relatives who think that Muhammad was a predator (my Uncle Billy - that's a whole different story for another day) and sometimes I need to let my guard down and admit that there of course, are issues with Islam. Heaves to Betsy, I don't want to sound like a stinkin apologist.
Most importantly, she reminded me that something about these Islamic schools is contributing to militancy:
The Qur'an, taken out of historical context, just like the old and new Testaments are violent books. Stories of battles and hatred are intertwined in stories of compassion and empathy. Manipulated and perverted by the 'right' kind of people - militants in Islamic school - they are all dangerous. (Ie the use of the Bible to justify Christian militancy and the Torah to justify that of violent Jewish settlers.)
Big Dre's (Andrea) important point el numero dos: The manner of teaching at these schools - the way, the pedagogy, or lack thereof (sorry to use this phrase twice), is problematic; it is indoctrination. These kids are taught to obey, to follow, to listen. They are not taught to question, to think critically, to evaluate. Anything the 'teacher' says, goes. And he has a gun, so, even if you don't believe him, you're eventually intimidated into doing so.
The Qur'an taken out of historical context (like all holy books) combined with the indoctrination style teaching a la Stalin or Mussolini are a recipe for disaster.
Monday, May 4, 2009
I've got a bone to pick with you, Tavernese.
Sabrina Tavernese, I'm really angry with you. Your article today on the front page of the NYTimes is just plain wrong in its blatant direct linking of Islam to militancy in Pakistan. Ugh, the last thing we need is someone else purporting this hollow stereotype. It is most problematic bc the more we blame Islam, the further we get from a solution to the real roots of the problems there (this case in Pakistan), and the further moderate Muslims move from us.
This line really got my blood a boiling: (Good thing for you, Sabrina, I read it at a bar with a nice glass of full bodied red wine. Is there any other type of wine really though.)
"The schools offer almost no instruction beyond the memorizing of the Koran creating a widening pool of young minds that are sympathetic to militancy."
Koran = sympathy to militancy? Please don't tell me you think that Islam is to blame for all of this violence?
Despite these romantic 'violent Muslim' lines, in reading the rest of the article one can see that militancy in Pakistan has other roots, like a lack of economic opportunity (no jobs) and the lack of mobility due to the importance of political connections. Tavernese, however, does not direct us toward these practical explanations, rather she continues to make unsubstantiated claims blaming Islam.
For example, throughout the article she states that despair and poverty and neglect have created this space for the Islamic schools. My response is: Then is it not this desperation and neglect and poverty that cause militancy? Why is it Islam?
Furthermore, just because the kids that go to these schools become militants doesn't mean it's because of Islam, I'd argue it is because of the networks they fall into in these schools and the desparation they feel.
Also, these Islamic schools might teach these kids messed up conservative crap (no music, etc) but most of it, first of all, is not even 'Islamic' and second of all, what they teach is not the root of the problem, why they are there is.
Why are they there? Because there are few public schools and fewer good ones. Tavernese even states that few kids actually go to any school in these regions; Islamic schools make up only 7% of all primary schools. Private schooling is out - too expensive in these parts.
Many kids that attend these Islamic schools have nowhere else to go; these kids are usually the poorest of the poor. Islamic schools don't charge much, if anything, due to financing from the state. It is these kids that are vulnerable to militants, but they are vulnerable not because of their religious feelings but because of their poverty and desperation - their total lack of social networks and economic opportunities and political connections.
This line really got my blood a boiling: (Good thing for you, Sabrina, I read it at a bar with a nice glass of full bodied red wine. Is there any other type of wine really though.)
"The schools offer almost no instruction beyond the memorizing of the Koran creating a widening pool of young minds that are sympathetic to militancy."
Koran = sympathy to militancy? Please don't tell me you think that Islam is to blame for all of this violence?
Despite these romantic 'violent Muslim' lines, in reading the rest of the article one can see that militancy in Pakistan has other roots, like a lack of economic opportunity (no jobs) and the lack of mobility due to the importance of political connections. Tavernese, however, does not direct us toward these practical explanations, rather she continues to make unsubstantiated claims blaming Islam.
For example, throughout the article she states that despair and poverty and neglect have created this space for the Islamic schools. My response is: Then is it not this desperation and neglect and poverty that cause militancy? Why is it Islam?
Furthermore, just because the kids that go to these schools become militants doesn't mean it's because of Islam, I'd argue it is because of the networks they fall into in these schools and the desparation they feel.
Also, these Islamic schools might teach these kids messed up conservative crap (no music, etc) but most of it, first of all, is not even 'Islamic' and second of all, what they teach is not the root of the problem, why they are there is.
Why are they there? Because there are few public schools and fewer good ones. Tavernese even states that few kids actually go to any school in these regions; Islamic schools make up only 7% of all primary schools. Private schooling is out - too expensive in these parts.
Many kids that attend these Islamic schools have nowhere else to go; these kids are usually the poorest of the poor. Islamic schools don't charge much, if anything, due to financing from the state. It is these kids that are vulnerable to militants, but they are vulnerable not because of their religious feelings but because of their poverty and desperation - their total lack of social networks and economic opportunities and political connections.
These grievances are classic fodder for revolutions, as I commented on here, it has happened plenty of places over time, Iran, China, Russia, the list goes on.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Taking Back Islam.
Nicholas Kristof reported on an extremely important conference that took place last week at Notre Dame "Quran in its Historical Context".
Strict Islamic scholars have tried to remove the Qur'an over time from interpretation and meaningful discussion, 'protecting'/ prohibiting it from adapting and adjusting to the modern world. They do this because to interpret it literally justifies their own hunger for power and privilege, and also at times because they feel insecure, that Islam is under attack.
In fact, no religion's holy book should be (and is today by rational people - even religious figures) read literally. The Bible and the Torah are full of violence and contradictions. Karen Armstrong, who religion is lucky to have as a scholar, tells us that the only thing we CAN and should take away from every passage in the Bible, like from every Surah in the Qur'an, is compassion - the whole do unto others. (She spoke brilliantly about this on Bill Moyers a few weeks back.)
Dr. Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, highlighted in Kristoff's article, encourages moving away from literal interpretations of the Qur'an. He correctly argues that at the core of Islam's holy book, is that lesson of compassion: social justice, human rights and women's rights.
It is up to Muslims like Dr. Abu Zayd and Fatima Mernissi (Islamic feminism) and Islamic democrats - to take back their religion through conferences and discussions as such, and books and articles, but it is up to all of us to not fall into the trap of blaming Islam for violence and oppression of women. Those conditions are not there bc of Islam, rather they have political, social and economic roots. As non-Muslims, our attacks on Islam only lead to further protectionism and insecurity which serves the purpose of corrupt, dictatorial Muslim scholars.
Here I wrote about a similar conference in Turkey last year.
Here is a truly excellent analysis of various verses of Islam's holy book entitled "Taliban's Coercion Betrays the Qur'an" by Aloysious Mowe, International Visiting Fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center, Georgetown University.
Strict Islamic scholars have tried to remove the Qur'an over time from interpretation and meaningful discussion, 'protecting'/ prohibiting it from adapting and adjusting to the modern world. They do this because to interpret it literally justifies their own hunger for power and privilege, and also at times because they feel insecure, that Islam is under attack.
In fact, no religion's holy book should be (and is today by rational people - even religious figures) read literally. The Bible and the Torah are full of violence and contradictions. Karen Armstrong, who religion is lucky to have as a scholar, tells us that the only thing we CAN and should take away from every passage in the Bible, like from every Surah in the Qur'an, is compassion - the whole do unto others. (She spoke brilliantly about this on Bill Moyers a few weeks back.)
Dr. Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, highlighted in Kristoff's article, encourages moving away from literal interpretations of the Qur'an. He correctly argues that at the core of Islam's holy book, is that lesson of compassion: social justice, human rights and women's rights.
It is up to Muslims like Dr. Abu Zayd and Fatima Mernissi (Islamic feminism) and Islamic democrats - to take back their religion through conferences and discussions as such, and books and articles, but it is up to all of us to not fall into the trap of blaming Islam for violence and oppression of women. Those conditions are not there bc of Islam, rather they have political, social and economic roots. As non-Muslims, our attacks on Islam only lead to further protectionism and insecurity which serves the purpose of corrupt, dictatorial Muslim scholars.
Here I wrote about a similar conference in Turkey last year.
Here is a truly excellent analysis of various verses of Islam's holy book entitled "Taliban's Coercion Betrays the Qur'an" by Aloysious Mowe, International Visiting Fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center, Georgetown University.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Who you calling a moderate Islamic state? - Turkey
I read a couple articles that give Turkish perspective on Obamas visit. One was "Turkey in Full", an oped in the NYTimes.
The biggest deal to the Turks was that Obama did not call Turkey a 'moderate Islamic state' which it is not. This was basically what Bush and others called the state to support their own misguided foreign policy goals.
Turks HATE being called a moderate Islamic state - they consider themselves a secular democratic state.
The biggest deal to the Turks was that Obama did not call Turkey a 'moderate Islamic state' which it is not. This was basically what Bush and others called the state to support their own misguided foreign policy goals.
Turks HATE being called a moderate Islamic state - they consider themselves a secular democratic state.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Poll: Majority Americans Favor Engagment with Muslim World
Wash Post ABC poll out today says: (Article and charts here)
Majority of Americans think it is important that the Obama improve relations with the Muslim World
65% feel they lack understanding of the Muslim World
29% think it encourages violence, 58% do not, 13% don't know
If any of those 29% are reading this, doubtful shot in the dark, I encourage them to consider that what makes people engage in violence might be about lack of political expression and political channels, lack of economic opportunity, lack of social outlets in society, not Islam. Islam legitimizes violence; it does not create it.
Robin Wright (author of recent new book on reform movements in the region, Dreams and Shadows: The Future of the Middle East) mentioned on Tom Ashbrook's On Point last night after talking about the poll that the language of Islam and symbols of Islam are used in opposition movements, "they provide vocabulary for revolution" (she was talking about soft revolutions), in the Muslim World to combat dictators for example, but the west should not fear or overemphasize the importance of Islam as reactionary and revolutionary - it is not about piety and "Islam is a means to an end not an end in itself."
Majority of Americans think it is important that the Obama improve relations with the Muslim World
65% feel they lack understanding of the Muslim World
29% think it encourages violence, 58% do not, 13% don't know
If any of those 29% are reading this, doubtful shot in the dark, I encourage them to consider that what makes people engage in violence might be about lack of political expression and political channels, lack of economic opportunity, lack of social outlets in society, not Islam. Islam legitimizes violence; it does not create it.
Robin Wright (author of recent new book on reform movements in the region, Dreams and Shadows: The Future of the Middle East) mentioned on Tom Ashbrook's On Point last night after talking about the poll that the language of Islam and symbols of Islam are used in opposition movements, "they provide vocabulary for revolution" (she was talking about soft revolutions), in the Muslim World to combat dictators for example, but the west should not fear or overemphasize the importance of Islam as reactionary and revolutionary - it is not about piety and "Islam is a means to an end not an end in itself."
Friday, April 3, 2009
Muslim Brotherhood leader decides not to seek another term
Interesting post by Marc Lynch (Abu Ardvark) and an article in The National that Muhammad Mahdi Akef, leader/Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), will not seek a second term.
Here is another article on this in Cairo's Al Ahram.
This potentially opens the door for a reformist leader for the MB, the largest, longest running Islamic democratic reform party.
This is exciting also bc the MB actually has a democratic process of selecting a Supreme Guide, as Marc Lynch tells us:
"This announcement by the 81 year old Akef creates an extremely interesting and important moment in the history of the Brotherhood. The change in leadership has potentially wide-ranging implications for moderate Islamist movements throughout the Middle East. Will he be replaced by a politically-oriented reformist or by a religiously-oriented conservative? Will he be replaced by an Egyptian or by a non-Egyptian from the global Brotherhood movement? And will his successor retain Akef's strong hostility to al-Qaeda style jihadism and commitment to participation in the political process?
It may surprise people to realize that Akef will be replaced in an internally democratic process. As I understand the process, the Supreme Guide is elected by the Brotherhood's Shura Council, which has 100 members -- 80 of them elected by the membership of the organization and 20 of them holding ex officio membership (i.e. current and former members of the Guidance Council). Since the Muslim Brotherhood remains by far the largest and most politically significant mainstream Sunni Islamist movement, this internal election may be one of the most significant in the Middle East's so-called "year of elections."
I have posted on this before, but I see the Muslim Brotherhood (Islamic Democrats) as a potential beacon of hope for democratic rule in the region, specifically in Egypt. They have consistently participated in elections...well, when Mubarak doesn't arrest them all that is.
Here is another article on this in Cairo's Al Ahram.
This potentially opens the door for a reformist leader for the MB, the largest, longest running Islamic democratic reform party.
This is exciting also bc the MB actually has a democratic process of selecting a Supreme Guide, as Marc Lynch tells us:
"This announcement by the 81 year old Akef creates an extremely interesting and important moment in the history of the Brotherhood. The change in leadership has potentially wide-ranging implications for moderate Islamist movements throughout the Middle East. Will he be replaced by a politically-oriented reformist or by a religiously-oriented conservative? Will he be replaced by an Egyptian or by a non-Egyptian from the global Brotherhood movement? And will his successor retain Akef's strong hostility to al-Qaeda style jihadism and commitment to participation in the political process?
It may surprise people to realize that Akef will be replaced in an internally democratic process. As I understand the process, the Supreme Guide is elected by the Brotherhood's Shura Council, which has 100 members -- 80 of them elected by the membership of the organization and 20 of them holding ex officio membership (i.e. current and former members of the Guidance Council). Since the Muslim Brotherhood remains by far the largest and most politically significant mainstream Sunni Islamist movement, this internal election may be one of the most significant in the Middle East's so-called "year of elections."
I have posted on this before, but I see the Muslim Brotherhood (Islamic Democrats) as a potential beacon of hope for democratic rule in the region, specifically in Egypt. They have consistently participated in elections...well, when Mubarak doesn't arrest them all that is.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Abdi Kadir Ali and I think alike. Who knew?
In a Wash Post article today on the brain drain in Somalia, there is a section on discussions exiled Somalis are having in Eastleigh, Kenya.
Abdi Kadir Ali, who earned a political science degree in London and returned to Somalia to start a think tank (ambitious) to promote dialogue, states in the article "People became so suspicious, --they'd say [to him] maybe you're a spy or you're promoting Western ideologies...So I started taking about bottom-up economics instead of of globalization. Instead of human rights I'd say 'Islamic human rights.'"
Go Abdi! You rock. And you're a smart man.
I've written posts now and again about the importance of placing the word Islam in front of democracy or feminism in the region. People are suspicious of these movements not because they see them as western, but as ideas that were forced upon them over the past half century. (Like in Somalia - when US backed Ethiopian troops came in and overthrew the Islamist government and said they were establishing a 'democracy.' Please.) See, for example, my post below on Karen Armstrong on Bill Moyers. Better yet please please please (I'm begging) watch the interview here on the website, it is the most enlightening 15 minutes ever.)
Islam is the most revered respected institution in the region. Just as extremists have used it to justify their radicalism (and it clearly has been effective), moderates and reformists should - many already are - use it to justify their struggle for peace and democracy and women's and human rights.
Abdi Kadir Ali, who earned a political science degree in London and returned to Somalia to start a think tank (ambitious) to promote dialogue, states in the article "People became so suspicious, --they'd say [to him] maybe you're a spy or you're promoting Western ideologies...So I started taking about bottom-up economics instead of of globalization. Instead of human rights I'd say 'Islamic human rights.'"
Go Abdi! You rock. And you're a smart man.
I've written posts now and again about the importance of placing the word Islam in front of democracy or feminism in the region. People are suspicious of these movements not because they see them as western, but as ideas that were forced upon them over the past half century. (Like in Somalia - when US backed Ethiopian troops came in and overthrew the Islamist government and said they were establishing a 'democracy.' Please.) See, for example, my post below on Karen Armstrong on Bill Moyers. Better yet please please please (I'm begging) watch the interview here on the website, it is the most enlightening 15 minutes ever.)
Islam is the most revered respected institution in the region. Just as extremists have used it to justify their radicalism (and it clearly has been effective), moderates and reformists should - many already are - use it to justify their struggle for peace and democracy and women's and human rights.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Muslim activist story on This American Life
Interesting argument voiced today on This American Life (second story) on NPR - story on a Muslim activist in the US who was falsely labeled an extremist with terrorist ties. The story proves the accusation to be false, then makes a very interesting point:
"People here cannot imagine that there is a moderate Muslim...Muslims active in the US political community are immediately named extremists and terrorists."
"People here cannot imagine that there is a moderate Muslim...Muslims active in the US political community are immediately named extremists and terrorists."
Somalia...Hope for an Islamic democracy? Moderate Islamic rule?
I think Somalia will be an interesting place to watch with newly elected president and moderate Islamist leader Sharif Ahmad in office.
Here is a Wash Post article about it. I am looking for others.
He might be one of the 'good' Islamists, and is already starting to confront - through violence and diplomacy and reconciliation - the more extremist Shabaab movement.
We'll see - he has stated that democracy and Islam are NOT incompatible and the women can serve in Parliament. He has the respect of Somali cleric which the past secular leader did not.
As I have said before, Islam, gives democratic movements in the ME legitimacy. A democratic party has zilch standing (as it is usually associated with Western imperialism, force and imposition, more so after Iraq) but an Islamic democratic party, wooohoo, now we're getting somewhere.
Here is a Wash Post article about it. I am looking for others.
He might be one of the 'good' Islamists, and is already starting to confront - through violence and diplomacy and reconciliation - the more extremist Shabaab movement.
We'll see - he has stated that democracy and Islam are NOT incompatible and the women can serve in Parliament. He has the respect of Somali cleric which the past secular leader did not.
As I have said before, Islam, gives democratic movements in the ME legitimacy. A democratic party has zilch standing (as it is usually associated with Western imperialism, force and imposition, more so after Iraq) but an Islamic democratic party, wooohoo, now we're getting somewhere.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Karen Armstrong on Bill Moyers "in this context secluarism doesn't seem the benign privilege that it has been for you and me it feels like an assault"
Everyone interested in understanding Islam and Muslims distaste for what we think of as benevolent Western foreign policies should listen to Karen Armstrong on Bill Moyers tonight. MOST OF ALL LISTEN TO HER LAST PORTION OF THE TALK!! In which she discusses secularism (and I think implies democracy) in the Middle East.
She does an amazing job of explaining that many Muslims do not take to secularism and democracy bc it has always been imposed violently and suddenly today and throughout history. Usually what happens on the ground there is not democracy but dictators talking about democracy (Nasser, Mubarak.)
Here are some quotes - some words might be slightly off.
"They have experience secularism as an assault."
"We had the chance for it (secularism, modernism, democracy) to trickle down slowly...It was forced upon them."
She gave examples of Ataturk's forceful sudden removal of Islam (still has some negative implications on Turkey today), how the Shah's troops tore off women's veils and ripped them to pieces and shot the peaceful demonstrators at the mosque before the revolution.
MOST IMPORTANTLY recounts how Sunni extremism was born in the context of torture in Egyptian prisons, where men were tortured and executed for handing out pamphlets (ie Qtub)...so this is going on, from his jail cell these men heard Nasser vow to secularize Egypt...secularism didn't seem so great...
"...in this context secularism doesn't seem the benign privilege that it has been for you and me it feels like an assault..." (I love this line.)
What do Muslims like about West? Freedom
What do they fear about West? Disrespect for Islam. When they hear uneducated comments on Islam. (See my pose on the forum held at AU on Islam and the Media..never any experts on Islam included on news programs on Islam...ridiculous.)
Where is the burden?
We have our part. They have their own.
Survey 35 Muslim countries: Just 7% said 9/11 justified, for political reasons.
She does an amazing job of explaining that many Muslims do not take to secularism and democracy bc it has always been imposed violently and suddenly today and throughout history. Usually what happens on the ground there is not democracy but dictators talking about democracy (Nasser, Mubarak.)
Here are some quotes - some words might be slightly off.
"They have experience secularism as an assault."
"We had the chance for it (secularism, modernism, democracy) to trickle down slowly...It was forced upon them."
She gave examples of Ataturk's forceful sudden removal of Islam (still has some negative implications on Turkey today), how the Shah's troops tore off women's veils and ripped them to pieces and shot the peaceful demonstrators at the mosque before the revolution.
MOST IMPORTANTLY recounts how Sunni extremism was born in the context of torture in Egyptian prisons, where men were tortured and executed for handing out pamphlets (ie Qtub)...so this is going on, from his jail cell these men heard Nasser vow to secularize Egypt...secularism didn't seem so great...
"...in this context secularism doesn't seem the benign privilege that it has been for you and me it feels like an assault..." (I love this line.)
What do Muslims like about West? Freedom
What do they fear about West? Disrespect for Islam. When they hear uneducated comments on Islam. (See my pose on the forum held at AU on Islam and the Media..never any experts on Islam included on news programs on Islam...ridiculous.)
Where is the burden?
We have our part. They have their own.
Survey 35 Muslim countries: Just 7% said 9/11 justified, for political reasons.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Where's the Muslim Outrage Over Darfur???
Thank you Ahmet Alibasic! This is exactly what I've been trying to say!
Sudaese President Omar Bashir has killed hundred of thousands of Muslims in Darfur, sending more to refugee camps, even burning mosques!
Great op-ed in WSJ from a Bosnian Muslim on this.
Again, it's not about religion.
Sudaese President Omar Bashir has killed hundred of thousands of Muslims in Darfur, sending more to refugee camps, even burning mosques!
Great op-ed in WSJ from a Bosnian Muslim on this.
Again, it's not about religion.
Article - WSJ on Islam and Peace
Islam Needs to Prove It's a Religion of Peace in WSJ
Tawfiq Hamid (a former member of an Islamist terrorist group, is an Islamic reformer and senior fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies) calls on Islamic scholars to stop teaching about violent practices in Islam and to speak out against traditional practices with no place in this world.
He argues that..."we [Muslims] must blame the leading Islamic scholars for having failed to produce an authoritative book on Islamic jurisprudence that is accepted in the Islamic world and unambiguously rejects these violent teachings."
He reminds us that stoning of women exists in the old testament and in the Sunna (Islamic tradition), the difference being that Jewish scholars have spoken out successfully against the practice, discontinued long ago, while Muslims have not.
WHY won't many Muslims give up these traditions? I think one answer is, broadly speaking, that they feel under threat - that their religion is under threat by local dictators and international actors. This pressure - be it real or perceived - must be relieved.
Tawfiq Hamid (a former member of an Islamist terrorist group, is an Islamic reformer and senior fellow at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies) calls on Islamic scholars to stop teaching about violent practices in Islam and to speak out against traditional practices with no place in this world.
He argues that..."we [Muslims] must blame the leading Islamic scholars for having failed to produce an authoritative book on Islamic jurisprudence that is accepted in the Islamic world and unambiguously rejects these violent teachings."
He reminds us that stoning of women exists in the old testament and in the Sunna (Islamic tradition), the difference being that Jewish scholars have spoken out successfully against the practice, discontinued long ago, while Muslims have not.
WHY won't many Muslims give up these traditions? I think one answer is, broadly speaking, that they feel under threat - that their religion is under threat by local dictators and international actors. This pressure - be it real or perceived - must be relieved.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Darfur and Beshir's ICC arrest warrant
While I am a firm believer that a country and a people can only move forward if those responsible for genocide and violence and perpetrating civil war and conflict are brought to justice, this justice must be timed to minimize civilian casualties and maximize effectiveness. I do not think this was the best time for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue a warrant for Sudanese President Omar Beshir's arrest.
(This, by the way, comes from a humanitarian, someone who wrote their Thesis on the history of Darfur - showing that the conflict was based on resources due to desertification rather than 'Arab' and 'African animosities. But I am also, as I said above, a firm believer that justice brings lasting peace.)
Truth and Reconciliation commissions in South Africa and Rwanda and Liberia and Sierra Leone have been helpful in improving relations among former warring parties. After conflicts end (or toward the end) in these countries, and when other nations can secure the safety of civilians, arrest warrants for war criminals are also effective and necessary.
There have been a boatload of great op eds on this - an interesting one today from Nicholas Kristof who is fearful of the humanitarian outcome of the warrant as aid agencies are kicked out of Darfur - leaving 100s of thousands vulnerable to disease and without access to water and food.
He also mentions that no one he spoke to in the camps a week ago favored a delay in ICC proceedings.
He echos General Merrill McPeaks advocacy in an oped in in the Wash Post last week for a no fly zone in Darfur.
The worst thing about Darfur is to read that other Muslims (Sudanese Muslims out in the streets supporting Beshir, Hamas citicizing the warrant) speak out against this warrant as another western imperialist strategy in the region. Beshir and his cabal have killed thousands of MUSLIMS in Darfur.
(This, by the way, comes from a humanitarian, someone who wrote their Thesis on the history of Darfur - showing that the conflict was based on resources due to desertification rather than 'Arab' and 'African animosities. But I am also, as I said above, a firm believer that justice brings lasting peace.)
Truth and Reconciliation commissions in South Africa and Rwanda and Liberia and Sierra Leone have been helpful in improving relations among former warring parties. After conflicts end (or toward the end) in these countries, and when other nations can secure the safety of civilians, arrest warrants for war criminals are also effective and necessary.
There have been a boatload of great op eds on this - an interesting one today from Nicholas Kristof who is fearful of the humanitarian outcome of the warrant as aid agencies are kicked out of Darfur - leaving 100s of thousands vulnerable to disease and without access to water and food.
He also mentions that no one he spoke to in the camps a week ago favored a delay in ICC proceedings.
He echos General Merrill McPeaks advocacy in an oped in in the Wash Post last week for a no fly zone in Darfur.
The worst thing about Darfur is to read that other Muslims (Sudanese Muslims out in the streets supporting Beshir, Hamas citicizing the warrant) speak out against this warrant as another western imperialist strategy in the region. Beshir and his cabal have killed thousands of MUSLIMS in Darfur.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Article - An End to Baghdad's 'Dark Era'
Nightclubs are reopening in Baghdad.
Interesting in this article is also the brief history it gives of the nightclubs - opened for most of Saddam's reign then closed in the 90s as he tried to gain favor of the religious leaders.
I am particularly excited about this bc I am going to work in Suleimaniya (up the NE, Kurdish region) next year at the two year old American University of Iraq at Suleimaniya (AUIS). I took a trip over there last week to get the lay of the land and liked what I saw. More on this to come.
Interesting in this article is also the brief history it gives of the nightclubs - opened for most of Saddam's reign then closed in the 90s as he tried to gain favor of the religious leaders.
I am particularly excited about this bc I am going to work in Suleimaniya (up the NE, Kurdish region) next year at the two year old American University of Iraq at Suleimaniya (AUIS). I took a trip over there last week to get the lay of the land and liked what I saw. More on this to come.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Also on calling out 'experts'
About a month ago, Ambassador & Professor Akbar Ahmad, American University Chair of Islamic Studies, called out the US media for not including experts on TV shows in discussions about Islam and the Middle East.
He pointed out, at a forum on "The Media and Islam" given by AU's School of Communication http://www.soc.american.edu/content.cfm?id=1185, that whenever Fox or CNBC or CNN or MSNBC, pick a channel, speak about and analyze Islam and the Middle East they NEVER have actual experts on or actual Muslims or Arabs on their shows. Yes of course you want to have diversity of opinion and background, and not ONLY have Muslims or Arabs or Middle East sympathizers as others might call us, but you want to have someone who maybe I don't know might be able to give you a firsthand account? Is a Middle Eastern historian? Sociologist? Anthropologist? An expert in Islam? Sharia? Someone who knows what Sharia is even please?
This also relates to an extremely important phenomenon: Americans and their leaders don't really WANT to understand the Middle East. It's just too much. Too complex. Too difficult. It would cause too much self reflection and uh oh, self deprecation. It's so easy to blame the violence on 'centuries of religious ethnic sectarian violence.' I mean as is, we don't have to look for the real problems, which are going to be thing we don't want to hear or see or face. That the legacy of colonization and the Cold War dynamic still have implications on how residents of the Middle East (and around the world) perceive of the US and Western powers. That the US acted arrogantly and we the public were duped. All the Bush administration and Cheney cared about were contracts for their oil buddies.
Americans don't want to hear that they can't have their oil and have it on the cheap too.
We don't want to hear that we might have to start thinking about a foreign policy that doesn't JUST consider ourselves, our economy.
We don't want to understand that we can only achieve security by taking into account the security of others and that this security is not achieved through simplistic military might but by a much more engaged, egalitarian, soft diplomacy that considers social justice and economic development.
He pointed out, at a forum on "The Media and Islam" given by AU's School of Communication http://www.soc.american.edu/content.cfm?id=1185, that whenever Fox or CNBC or CNN or MSNBC, pick a channel, speak about and analyze Islam and the Middle East they NEVER have actual experts on or actual Muslims or Arabs on their shows. Yes of course you want to have diversity of opinion and background, and not ONLY have Muslims or Arabs or Middle East sympathizers as others might call us, but you want to have someone who maybe I don't know might be able to give you a firsthand account? Is a Middle Eastern historian? Sociologist? Anthropologist? An expert in Islam? Sharia? Someone who knows what Sharia is even please?
This also relates to an extremely important phenomenon: Americans and their leaders don't really WANT to understand the Middle East. It's just too much. Too complex. Too difficult. It would cause too much self reflection and uh oh, self deprecation. It's so easy to blame the violence on 'centuries of religious ethnic sectarian violence.' I mean as is, we don't have to look for the real problems, which are going to be thing we don't want to hear or see or face. That the legacy of colonization and the Cold War dynamic still have implications on how residents of the Middle East (and around the world) perceive of the US and Western powers. That the US acted arrogantly and we the public were duped. All the Bush administration and Cheney cared about were contracts for their oil buddies.
Americans don't want to hear that they can't have their oil and have it on the cheap too.
We don't want to hear that we might have to start thinking about a foreign policy that doesn't JUST consider ourselves, our economy.
We don't want to understand that we can only achieve security by taking into account the security of others and that this security is not achieved through simplistic military might but by a much more engaged, egalitarian, soft diplomacy that considers social justice and economic development.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Turkey to the Rescue
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/world/asia/04islam.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin
The article on the front page of the NYTimes today, Sunday May 4, "Turkish Schools Offer an Gentler Islam" is one that all should read.
A group of Turkish teachers and educators have opened schools in the NW province of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan credited for being a breeding ground for militants. The schools' aim to counteract the radical fundamentalist Islamic schools in the area by providing a balanced alternative: A well rounded curriculum that includes (but is not limited to) Islamic studies and prayer. The Turkish run schools teach Science, English, Math, History in addition to a course on Islam. They encourgae Islamic ways of life in dormitories.The article focuses on Mesut Kacmaz, a Turk teaching in Pakistan; he is quoted throughout the story, "Whatever the West has of science, let our kids have it, but let our kids have religion as well." This quote is important because Muslims must realize that science and Islam are not in opposition to one another as many corrupt fake Islamic scholars have taught. (See below paragraph for a brief background on this.)
(Bkgrnd: There was a backlash against subjects such as science and math that went along with the backlash against things western after years of imperialism, colonialism, oppression and discrimination against the Muslim world and Middle East by Europe and the West. However crazy you might think this is, it happened, and it is crucial that these subjects are reintroduced. There is precendence for this argument: A long history of Islamic scholars have attempted to show that science and math are not 'Western' but universal subjects. In fact, they originated in the East; Cairo and Baghdad were historical centers of learning before Western scholars began thinking about matters such as math: Al-Gebra for example. Two great examples 19th Century Islamic scholars Muhammad Abdo and Jamal al Din al Afghani who are considered 'Islamic Modernists' for their writings advocating higher learning - science, literature, math - within the framework of Islam.)
Back to the article. Also mentioned is Turkish Islamic scholar Fetullah Gulen, who sounds like a modern day Afghani, "without science religion turns to radicalism' he is quoted as saying. He advocates again, moderate Islam taught alongside Literature, Math, Science, and History.
The article also touches on how these fundamentalist schools contribute to the perversion of Islam: Power hungry men use these schools as venues for selling their militant agenda, misinterpreting the Quran and hadiths to recruit young followers. The article quotes Matiullah Aail, a religious scholar in Quetta who graduated from Medina University in Saudi which clearly gives him some street cred in the Muslim world. He compares these radical mullahs to lawyers and doctors, "Doctors and lawyers have to their degrees. But when it comes to mullahs, no one asks them for their qualifications. They don't have knowledge, but they are influential." Knowledgeable educators, like those coming from Turkey, will teach students to see through these fake radical Islamic scholars.
Using a balanced curriculum to teach the Pakistani youth how to think broadly and critically, not militarizing the region, arming tribesmen, and dropping bombs a la US foreign policy, will defeat radicalism and militants.
The article dubs these Turkish teachers the Muslim Peace Corps which I thought was fitting as an ex Peace Corps volunteer.
The article on the front page of the NYTimes today, Sunday May 4, "Turkish Schools Offer an Gentler Islam" is one that all should read.
A group of Turkish teachers and educators have opened schools in the NW province of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan credited for being a breeding ground for militants. The schools' aim to counteract the radical fundamentalist Islamic schools in the area by providing a balanced alternative: A well rounded curriculum that includes (but is not limited to) Islamic studies and prayer. The Turkish run schools teach Science, English, Math, History in addition to a course on Islam. They encourgae Islamic ways of life in dormitories.The article focuses on Mesut Kacmaz, a Turk teaching in Pakistan; he is quoted throughout the story, "Whatever the West has of science, let our kids have it, but let our kids have religion as well." This quote is important because Muslims must realize that science and Islam are not in opposition to one another as many corrupt fake Islamic scholars have taught. (See below paragraph for a brief background on this.)
(Bkgrnd: There was a backlash against subjects such as science and math that went along with the backlash against things western after years of imperialism, colonialism, oppression and discrimination against the Muslim world and Middle East by Europe and the West. However crazy you might think this is, it happened, and it is crucial that these subjects are reintroduced. There is precendence for this argument: A long history of Islamic scholars have attempted to show that science and math are not 'Western' but universal subjects. In fact, they originated in the East; Cairo and Baghdad were historical centers of learning before Western scholars began thinking about matters such as math: Al-Gebra for example. Two great examples 19th Century Islamic scholars Muhammad Abdo and Jamal al Din al Afghani who are considered 'Islamic Modernists' for their writings advocating higher learning - science, literature, math - within the framework of Islam.)
Back to the article. Also mentioned is Turkish Islamic scholar Fetullah Gulen, who sounds like a modern day Afghani, "without science religion turns to radicalism' he is quoted as saying. He advocates again, moderate Islam taught alongside Literature, Math, Science, and History.
The article also touches on how these fundamentalist schools contribute to the perversion of Islam: Power hungry men use these schools as venues for selling their militant agenda, misinterpreting the Quran and hadiths to recruit young followers. The article quotes Matiullah Aail, a religious scholar in Quetta who graduated from Medina University in Saudi which clearly gives him some street cred in the Muslim world. He compares these radical mullahs to lawyers and doctors, "Doctors and lawyers have to their degrees. But when it comes to mullahs, no one asks them for their qualifications. They don't have knowledge, but they are influential." Knowledgeable educators, like those coming from Turkey, will teach students to see through these fake radical Islamic scholars.
Using a balanced curriculum to teach the Pakistani youth how to think broadly and critically, not militarizing the region, arming tribesmen, and dropping bombs a la US foreign policy, will defeat radicalism and militants.
The article dubs these Turkish teachers the Muslim Peace Corps which I thought was fitting as an ex Peace Corps volunteer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
