Pages

Showing posts with label Christendom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christendom. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Christendom and Islam

Western governments simply do not understand Islam or the Muslim countries. These Islamic countries were created by the West in what they thought was the best interest of the people and certainly in the best interest of the West but these are fragile creations that have only the most tenuous hold on reality. Christendom is essentially composed of all of the Westernized and Christian nation states but there is no centralized authority or unifying force. Any unifying Christian force ceased with Martin Luther and certainly ended altogether with Henry VIII who split from the Pope altogether. While loyalties to family, church, ethnic group or other organizations exist in Christendom, these loyalties are always subservient to the nation state. This is not true in Islam. In Islam loyalties are to the family, the clan, the tribe, and Islam in that order with any loyalty to such a thing as a nation state being of secondary importance if it exists at all. In fact the internal politics of these Islamic states tends to be tribal in nature and this can be seen in the internal conflicts that plague all of the Islamic states. These Islamic states are really tribal organizations – essentially “tribes with flags” with a seventh century ethos, where blood feuds are common and personal honor paramount. But whatever they are these Islamic states are not nation states in the Western model and to continue to view their governments as having the same level of authority and respect as Western governments is a major error in judgment.

From a Western perspective these Islamic states are truly barbarous where they stone adulterers and homosexuals to death, lash miscreants for minor offenses, maim others for things such as theft, deny equal rights to women, and see it as their duty to kill all infidels. Recently there was an explosion in an Iranian Mosque and the authorities initially thought that the arms and ammunition stored in the Mosque were not handled properly and exploded. As it turned out this was not the situation but the fact that it was the initial reaction is very telling, when you consider their reaction to any damage to a Mosque by the American Military. Furthermore, Muslims consider it their duty to destroy all Christian Churches and to kill all Christians and this is currently going on in many if not most Islamic countries. For most Christians it would be unthinkable to use a church as an ammunition dump, but to Muslims it is routine practice, particularly due to the fact that the morally superior western democracies would never attack a Mosque. The whole moral structure of Islam is almost totally opposite of that in Christendom. In Saudi Arabia the mere possession of a Bible is a capital offense. All of this moral ambiguity is well known in the West but Westerners continue to see Islam as having equivalent morality and the Islamic countries as nation states with authority. In fact they have only limited authority and are heavily influenced by various religious leaders who may not even be citizens in their countries.

What is not recognized in the West is that since the fall of the Ottomans there has been a power struggle going on throughout the Muslim world as various groups and individuals compete to unify Islam under one central authority—the Caliphate. The Islamic concept of ummah ( cultural unification) actually presupposes the illegitimacy of the nation state but this ummah or unification can only be accomplished through the actions of a strong core state or group, which does not currently exist. However, shortly after the death of Mohammed Islam spread across all of North Africa and culminated in the first central authority in the form of the Umayyad Caliphate whose capital was Damascus (Syria did not exist). This was followed by the Abbasid Caliphate with a capital in Baghdad. This was followed by other Caliphates beginning in the tenth century, but by the thirteenth century the Ottoman Turks rose in the Middle East, conquered Constantinople and established a new Caliphate that stood until the end of WW I. With the fall of the Ottomans the Western Powers created these arbitrary states in the Western model without regard to tribe, clan, or religious grouping and since that time Islam has been without a core state and unstable as the various factions vie for supremacy while some, such as the Kurds, vie for autonomy.

This power struggle is obscured by the American presence in Iraq, but it is being played out in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. The Shiite’s represent only a small percentage of Muslims, but they currently dominate Iran and Iraq and are easily the most organized and heavily armed. But the Sunni majority will not tolerate Shiite control or a Shia Caliphate so it is unlikely that any religious leader in either of these Shiite dominated countries can muster enough support to unify Islam and restore the Caliphate. However, the power struggle is increasingly violent with each group blaming the US in order to disguise their violation of Islamic law in their fight for supremacy. This is apparent in the recent battles between the Iraqi government and the Iranian backed Militia’s, which are actually power struggles between two Shiite groups, with the US backing one side and the Iranians the other. Because these are both Shiite groups the Sunni majority isn’t happy with the US support of the Shiites so Iraq remains unstable. The problem actually stems from the failure of the US to recognize that a democratic government is totally alien to the Islamic World and supporting the government is actually viewed as supporting a specific Shiite group. It would have been better to have established an authoritarian government but since that didn’t happen, it might be better to allow a military dictatorship to evolve that would be pro-American. A failure to resolve this problem can only allow time for a strong Islamic leader to emerge and that could be in Turkey.

There is growing unrest in Turkey as the Western Powers continue to treat Turkey as a second class country. The Ottomans joined the Germans because they were poorly treated by the British and it seems we are making the same mistake again. If Turkey rejects the secular government established by Ataturk, then they could easily become the stable government that could form the foundation for another Islamic Empire equivalent to the Ottoman Empire, but richer, more stable, and more heavily armed. This would be a disaster for the West and would certainly pit Islam against Christendom once again.

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

How The World Turns

I am not a political analyst nor am I a military strategist, but I do read a great deal of history in terms of both subjects. Therefore, as I observe global events over the past several years I am beginning to wonder how much most Americans understand what is behind these events and their headlines. It seems to me that most Americans, like most Westerners, tend to think in terms of their culture and experience rather than historical perspectives, so I thought some insight might be in order.

History
Africa is a mess and it has always been a mess. The African Natives are tribal, they have always been tribal and continue as tribes even today. When a Westerner looks at Africa he sees a continent made up of various countries, but these countries are creations of the European Imperial Powers and bear no relationship whatsoever to the historical tribal boundaries. The result has been off and on again conflict between tribes and countries dominated by various tribal strongmen. It is also worthwhile noting that while the Europeans capitalized on the slave trade, the reality is that trade was going on between various African Tribes and the Arab Muslims to the East before the Europeans came on to the scene. Furthermore this trade continued up until the 1960’s when it was “officially” banned by the Saudi Government but there is every reason to believe it continues even today.

The countries across North Africa, with the exception of Egypt and possibly Ethiopia are creations of the Imperial Powers. Most of these countries as well as those of the Middle East didn’t exist until France and England carved up the Ottoman Empire. It is worth noting that the Ottomans controlled all of what is now known as the Middle East, all of North Africa, Spain, (until the 15th Century), much of the Balkans, Turkey, and Persia. This Empire was larger than the Roman Empire and was Muslim, although Christians and Jews were permitted to live within the Empire. Although the Ottoman Empire was viewed as a political entity by the West, in reality it was a Theocracy dominated by various Emirs, Aga’s, and other Religious leaders, it was never a political organization as experienced in the West.

Then we have the problems associated with the Pacific Rim. China is technically a “communist” nation but in reality it is simply following the historical pattern of a strong central government. It used to be an Imperial Nation but the strength of the central government has always ebbed and flowed dominated now by warlords and then by a strongman. The difference between the old imperial system and the current “communist” system is virtually invisible. The same is true of India, which has historically been fragmented into small states until the British came. Since that time they have more or less been forged into a nation but they continue to teeter on the brink of re-fragmentation. The more interesting point here is that both China and Japan have considered Korea to be source of slaves, to be exploited by first one then the other. Koreans are looked down upon by both the Chinese and Japanese. Until the 1950’s Korea was an insignificant backwater and the incursion of the Chinese Communists have left us with North Korea, which is led by a central figure Kim Il Jong, who is bent and determined to establish himself as a major political figure. All of these are historical perspectives that seem to be lost on the public at large.

Christendom
In this context Christendom includes Christians, Jews, Atheists, and all others who are not Muslim. Christendom is characterized by a series of nation states, some democratic and some not, but all easily distinguished by borders and some sense of national identity. With some minor exceptions these nation states fight each other over various issues, usually regarding territory or economics, but rarely over religion. While it is true that when the West was emerging from the dark ages religion and religious wars were fought,but these largely disappeared by the 1600”s. The result is that today the West is comprised of nation states whose governments have authority and can be relied upon to act with authority.

Unfortunately, this seems to be the flaw in how the West is approaching the war on terror. For the typical Westerner, wars are fought between nation states over territory, economics, or resources, but never over an abstraction like freedom or religion. Because of this ingrained idea, the West continues to perceive Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Syria, and virtually all of the “nations” of the Middle East and Africa as “nations” run by a central government. They attempt to negotiate with these entities and to sign treaties without recognizing that these governments are inherently weak and are not viewed by the Muslim population as being independent of Islam or speaking for them.

The reality is that the Muslims have been dedicated to erasing all people and religions and are not interested in establishing any government other than an Islamic one based on Shar’ia Law. They are not interested in educating their people other than in Islam so they have no interest in technology, economics, education, or any culture other than Islamic. They do not believe in freedom of any kind and are dedicated to enforcing their view of the world. Most recently Israel gave up land to the Palestinians in a futile effort to buy peace and left behind green houses, buildings, and infrastructure. The Muslims came in and promptly destroyed all of it and continued to use the land to attack Israel. The strategy of “Land for Peace” failed and it will continue to fail because the Muslims do not want to create a modern state but want to destroy everything that is not Islamic. They want to return to the seventh century and “pure Islam”.

It is widely recognized that Iran is behind most – if not all – of the terrorism today, but rather than taking the battle to the Iranians, the West continues to focus on the offending “countries” as if the government of these “countries” had any authority over the people.

Islam
Iraq has historically been the seat of the Caliphate and thus the heart of Islam. It has been the seat of Muslim art and culture and has historically had a highly educated population. However, Muslims in general are not a highly educated people but that seems to be more of a symptom than a root cause of the anger and instability that characterizes Islam today. In fact there are two sides to the Islamic issue. On the external side there is the anger aimed at the West that is being channeled through religious activism. On the surface this appears to be the continuing effort by Islam to convert the world and stamp out all other religions. But to a large extent, this is really a ploy being used by Islamic leaders to distract their people from the gross mismanagement of their only revenue source which is oil. In the classic strategy of demagogues these religious leaders are using the West and Christendom as scapegoats for the appalling conditions that exist in most Muslim countries and this represents the internal conflict that is raging throughout Islam.

Islam is actually divided into the Sunni and the Shi’ia and this schism goes back to the 8th Century and rests on the dispute over who was (is) the true successor to Mohammed. Throughout history the Sunni’s have been the minority, but also the dominant sect who have exploited and abused the Shi’ia. With the overthrow of Shah the Shi’ia became the dominant sect in Iran. Iraq was a Sunni nation and Hussein attacked Iran for many reasons, but certainly one was to re-establish the Sunni dominance. When Saddam was overthrown that unleashed the Shi’ia who are out for revenge. But beyond this mundane seeking of revenge, behind the scenes is a power struggle that is raging over the leadership of Islam – the Caliphate. Osama bin Laden was well on the way to becoming the Caliph but when he was forced into hiding his power began to wane and others are attempting to establish their right to the Caliphate by attacking the West and indirectly the Sunni’s or the Shi’ia depending on which sect they belong to. The West is caught in the middle of this power struggle and until that is resolved it is unlikely the Muslims will stablize.

Saturday, July 01, 2006

The Ninth Crusade

The most surprising thing about events in the last fifty or so years is the almost total lack of Western Society to realize they are in the midst of a global war and appear to be losing it. This war is a war between Christendom and Islam, which is probably the reason most of the Western Powers have failed to recognize that it is in progress. From the perspective of the Muslims this is another crusade – the Ninth – and they repeatedly refer to the Western forces as “Crusaders”. This reference is fully recognized thoroughout Islam but is viewed as either quaint or nonsensical by the West. This is a grave mistake and this failure to recognize the current worldwide terrorism as a manifestation of this religious struggle between Islam and Christendom weakens the West strategically.

Christendom is composed of many nation states, cultures, and even religions and the West perceives the entire world as composed of these nation states, without regard to the fact that many of these nation states were created by the Western Powers as they carved up the Ottoman Empire at the end of WW I. Hence the West sees Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Syria, Lebanon, etc. as independent countries. The reality is that France and Britain in their usual arrogant and self-serving manner – created these countries as mandates and client states without regard to history or the people and certainly with little to no understanding of Islam. The leaders of these countries never had the support of the people and the countries were never totally stable and certainly never democratic. Of course Kemal Ataturk – a Turkish general over threw the last Ottoman dominated government in Turkey and established a secular government which still exists today, but this is a rarity in the Islamic world.

To some extent these European defined countries do exist but what is not recognized is that Islam is the unifying force, not national pride or patriotism. The unifying force throughout the Middle East is Islam and Islam is at war with Christendom and has been at war with Christendom since the death of Mohammed in the seventh century. The periods of peace between the Middle East and the West are viewed as periods of regrouping by Islam because they have never, and will never, abandon their objective of World Domination because they believe Islam was ordained by God and it is their duty to convert the world to Islam and kill all unbelievers.

Most Westerners view this objective of world domination by Islam as anachronistic, unrealistic, and perhaps even silly, but this attitude actually reflects the almost total ignorance the West has about Islam, its history, and their conflicts with Christendom. One of the most deceptive things being offered by the Muslims living in the West is their description of the term “Jihad”. These Muslims point out that Jihad means struggle and that within the Qur’an this can mean warfare or a moral struggle, so Muslims can be “Jihadists” and not be a threat to their host countries. While their definition of Jihad is correct what they fail to explain is that the use of this term outside of the Qur’an has always – even during Mohammed’s lifetime – meant warfare against infidels and apostates. Mohammed spread Islam by the sword and that has continued as the Islamic practice down to today. With this understanding, the following quote provides some insight into Islam and Jihad[1]

“In this as in so many other matters, the guidance of the Qur’an is amplified and elaborated in the hadi`ths, that is to say, traditions concerning the actions and utterances of the Prophet. Many of these deal with holy war. The following are a few samples.
· Jihad is you duty under any ruler, be he godly or wicked
· A day and night of fighting on the frontier is better than a month of fasting and prayer
· The nip of an ant hurts the martyr more than the thrust of a weapon, for these are more welcome to him than sweet, cold water on a hot summer day.
· He who dies without having taken part in a campaign dies in a kind of unbelief.
· God marvels at people (those to whom Islam is brought by conquest) who are dragged to Paradise in chains.
· Learn to shoot, for the space between the mark and the archer is one of the gardens of Paradise
· Paradise is in the shadow of swords."

Jihad is embedded in Islam from its outset and continues down to today. It is a religious duty for every Muslim, so is it any wonder why Muslims publicly condemn the worldwide slaughter of innocents but do little to stop it? Within Iraq we see Muslims killing Muslims by the hundreds or even thousands but little support is offered to the troops attempting to protect them. To support or ‘collaborate” with the Crusaders would be anti-Islamic. The fundamental point here is that within the world of Islam, the loyalty of the individual is first to Islam and not to a nation because nations are relatively new concepts in Islam. The same is true of governments. Westerners separate religion and government. This wasn’t always so but certainly since the 1600’s there has been a separation of church and state. While Christendom has nations and laws, these transcend the religious considerations but this isn’t the case within Islam. Islam overshadows and may override any government and this Islamic influence can be seen in the new Iraqi constitution where no law can be established that is non-Islamic. This falls short of establishing Shar’ia Law but it leaves open what is non-Islamic.

At the core of the current upheaval, which we call the War on Terror, is a form of religious reformation within Islam and the attacks on the Western Crusaders is part of that reforming activity but not its central thrust. Our reference to these Islamic reformers as “fundamentalists” is not really accurate because this is a Western term that carries subtle meanings that don’t apply. There really isn’t any dispute within the Muslim community over Islam itself, so no one is attempting to change or reform Islam. The dispute is that some Muslims like Osama bin Laden and the Muslim Brotherhood believe that many within the Islamic Community are turning away from the true faith and are becoming “apostate”. They blame this turning away on the West and Western Culture as epitomized by America – hence the reference to America as the Great Satan. More importantly, this view that Westernized Muslims are apostates permits Bin Laden and his supporters to kill other Muslims because the Qur’an specifically allows this and even directs that it be done.

For the West the ramifications of this Islamic reformation are significant for many reasons. Perhaps the first thing is that the West must realize the significance of the terms “the Great Satan” and “Crusaders” because this shows that what we are fighting a religious war and that this war is three sided with us in the middle. The Muslims are struggling internally over what is true Islam but the West represents the common enemy. We must also realize that dealing with national governments in Muslim countries does not have the same significance that we associate with nation states within Christendom. In the West there is a division between the political and the religious but this division does not exist in these Muslim countries. Islam makes no distinction between religion and government and more often than not the heads of state that we deal with are frequently viewed as Western Puppets. We see these as legitimately elected governments but within Islam elected representatives have little meaning and their authority frequently is legitimized only through the ulema (~ clergy).

Islam has – since its founding – been bent on world domination and the conversion of the world to Islam and Shar’ia (law). There has been a dispersion of Muslim across the Western World driven primarily by the oppression of their governments. The result is that within Europe and America there are large and growing Muslim populations. This drive within Islam to re-establish the “true Islam” may not affect all Muslims in the West but it need only affect a small percentage to have an enormous impact. This problem has already manifested itself in France and England and we have had hints of it in the US. We already know that many the Imams in many Mosques within the US preach hatred of the West and the Crusaders. We know that the Muslim community collects large sums for Hamas and Hezbollah. We have a strong belief in freedom of religion so we do not monitor or interfere with these Imams and they use this against us. They view our freedoms as weaknesses and examples of our moral corruption because we permit free speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. They are opposed to all of these things but we fail to recognize this as a threat to us. The lack of action and condemnation within the Muslim community is a silent warning which we are ignoring. We need to recognize the threat to our internal safety and begin to take action against these Imams. The British have already started but they may have waited to long, we should not make their mistake. We are in the midst of the Ninth Crusade and it is time we recognized it.

[1] Lewis, Bernard, The Crisis of Islam, New York, Modern Library, 2003