Home

Courses

C.V.

Books

Research Articles

Links

Interviews

Contact

Host: In his new book: “Islam Under Siege,” professor Akbar Ahmed writes that the fast pace of social change caused by globalization has left many in traditional societies feeling uncertain and vulnerable. Does that sense of vulnerability affect how Muslims practice Islam? And does the uncertainty of a changing world help or hurt the efforts of Muslims calling for democracy? I’ll ask my guests: Akbar Ahmed, author of “Islam Under Siege” and professor of Islamic Studies at American University; Louay Safi, director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy; and joining us by phone, Tamara Sonn, professor of religion and humanities at William and Mary College. Welcome and thanks for joining us today. Akbar Ahmed, what do you mean by your title, “Islam Under Siege”?
Ahmed: I’ve been, Eric, noticing for the last decade or so that many Muslims throughout the world feel under siege when they look at the Palestinians, the Balkans, the Chechens, in Kashmir. Throughout the world, as it were, Muslims are feeling under siege. Now this is much more complex than the title would suggest because at the same time in history, other societies are feeling under siege. The Israelis feel under siege, surrounded by the Arabs. The Indians feel under siege surrounded by Pakistan on one side and Bangladesh on the other side. And after September 11th, even Americans broadcast the news: “America under siege.” So it’s a very difficult and a very dangerous moment in world history.

Host: To what extent is this sense of being under siege about particular conflicts and to what extent do you also write about a sense of being under siege culturally and from globalization as a whole?

Ahmed: Well, several things are coming together. You have the process of globalization, all the technological changes, the advances and so on. You have political developments. And then you have the feeling that justice is not being given, that honor is not being restored or given to many, many people across the world and not only Muslims. Remember that societies generally are feeling a state of uncertainty, a state of vulnerability. And if you look at the globe and the turmoil, you can then make a correlation here of how societies are in fact very much with their backs up against the wall and that encourages the acts of violence.

Host: Louay Safi, do you agree that Muslims feel under siege?

Safi: I do agree. I think, probably I would put it this way: Muslims fear that they have not been invited to discourse and deal with issues that are being imposed on them. They are being ignored and a certain agenda of other nations is being imposed on them. So I think in this sense there is a sense of indignation and a sense of not being given the dignity that they deserve.

Host: Tamara Sonn, what do you make of these issues of feeling as though dignity is not being respected?

Sonn: Well, I think it’s an obvious pattern as the other two distinguished speakers have pointed out. And really, I trace it back to the fall of the Soviet Union. In the late eighties when it was clear that the Soviet Union was disintegrating, we began to hear more talk in the West, the United States and Europe about the “threat of Islam.” The 1979 revolution in Iran brought Ayatollah Khomeini to the fore and it was the beginning of the concern about the expansion of terrorism from the Islamic world. No other mentions of the Islamic world were made other than in terms of terrorism and threat. Then, when the Soviet Union fell, we began to hear talk of the “threat gap.” The East-West conflict sort of transmuted into the concept between the west and the Islamic world. And again, no mention made of Muslims or the Islamic world, or the great heritage of Islam. No other mention of Islam other than the threat and the terror. So, it was about that time that I began to notice as a Western scholar of Islam, growing concern among Muslims that they were being stereotyped and used almost to replace the Soviet Union, the green-tide, the threat of the clash of civilizations. And Muslims from that time began to be very, very concerned about this stereotyping of Muslims.

Host: Akbar Ahmed, come September 11th, there was a terrible terrorist attack on the U-S done in the name of Islam. So, is this just a matter of stereotyping?

Ahmed: No. America was shocked, justifiably so, there was a great tragedy on that terrible day. At the same time, at equal time, arguing is that there was a pattern forming, so that September 11th doesn’t come out of the blue. It’s part of this process taking place over the last two or three decades, I would say. And remember, I’m not only writing as a scholar. I’ve been an administrator. I’ve been a commissioner in charge of large areas of the Muslim world. So I know the mood. I know the feeling and I know how tribes and rulers groups work in the Muslim world. And I was seeing that after the 1980s onwards, that there was this pent up frustration. And this pent up frustration then explodes and what we saw on September 11th was one symptom of that explosion. It’s not going to be the last one unfortunately. And we have seen again and again that pattern repeats itself, so it’s important to understand what’s going on in the Muslim world.

Host: Now is that frustration though, is that a frustration of being ignored by the West or is that a frustration of there being too much contact with the West -- popular culture, things that are seen as somehow undermining traditional society?

Ahmed: I think that’s a very good question because it’s partly to do with the West, but it’s a lot to do with the Muslim world itself. If you look at the Muslim world, you see the gap between the rich and the poor increasing. You see the unemployment figures very high. You see the illiteracy rates, the poor education standards. So the sense of frustration, if you take the average city: Cairo, Karachi, Kuala Lumpur, you’ll get a very large percentage of the population: young, uneducated and unemployed. And you have the stage set for an explosion. It could be against America. It could be against a local government. It could be against another sect. You see the Shia-Sunni killing -- in Quetta, fifty people died. In South Iraq -- a hundred and twenty-five people died. These are explosions happening in society. And I would say that the leaders in the Muslim world need to be as concerned as the West needs to be concerned in the Muslim world.

Host: And what do you think of that Louay Safi?

Safi: Well, I think that definitely the source of turmoil and the problems we see in the Muslim world cannot be pinned on the West, but still the perception is that there is disparity of wealthy and poor and that while the Muslims are the victims of aggression, they are portrayed or seen in the West as the source of aggression. And so, I think this is kind of -- for example, U-S policy is very much criticized in the Muslim world because the U-S is seen always to come on the side of those who are, you know, fighting against Muslims: India, Israel.

Host: What about the case in Kosovo of Kosovar Albanians?

Safi: I think that was an excellent example of how the United States could change perception. And definitely many in the Muslim world have seen the intervention of the United States as positive, of course. One can argue that it’s subjective because it looks from that side of the world. But this is the perception, that in the case of Kosovo and in the case of Albania, Kosovo in particular and in the case of Bosnia, yes, the United States was perceived as trying to come on the side of the victims, not the side of the aggressors.

Host: Tamara Sonn, what do you think of this issue of frustration and where that frustration comes from? Is it local in origin or a result of global trends?

Sonn: Well, it’s both of course, because global trends affect local conditions. But let me just add to what Louay was saying before we get back to that particular question. I think what’s important for people in the West to understand is that there is a kind of reciprocal stereotyping that goes on. I mentioned before the concern and frustration that Muslims feel that what the West hears about Islam and Muslims is really only negative and really only based on the tragic atrocities that are considered to be aberrations from Islamic principles and standards. But, by the same token, what people in the rest of the world and in particular the Muslim world hear about America is likewise largely slanted and frequently narrowly viewed. So we do tend to export really the worst: The movies, the Hollywood movies and the sort of pornography and, you know, things that carry a very negative stereotype of America, of our wealth and decadence. So that what we find in fact is a massive disconnect, a massive lack of communication between these two great cultures. And in fact, I think Dr. Akbar’s work is pointing to the fact that they’re not really two completely separate cultures, there’s a growing trend toward communication, toward greater understanding and that’s what we really have to work toward. But at this point, the communication is frequently done in a very negative way, in a mutual stereotyping and a mutual blaming. So then getting back to your specific question: Are the problems and concerns and sources of frustration in the Muslim world local in origin or a result of global trends? I think they’re both. What we have to recognize is that conditions in the Muslim world are ongoing and have a long history based in colonialism. What we have noticed in the Muslim world: it’s only the last few decades where we’ve been directly involved. And we can’t understand that in fact, Western history is significantly involved in the negative conditions in the Muslim world. They’ve been trying to recover from third-world status. They’ve been saddled with unpopular leaders, many of whom are supported by Western powers. And against unpopular leaders who are supported by superpowers, there really is very little that the local population can do. So while we wonder why progress isn’t being made, they wonder why we don’t help them make progress. So it’s a combination of lack of understanding, local people feeling the effects of huge global patterns against which they feel incapable of dealing.

Host: I want to get back in a few minutes to the point that Tamara Sonn brings up of support from Western countries of governments that are not free governments. But before we do that, I want to talk a little bit more of this issue of how America is perceived in the Muslim world based on the entertainment that comes out of the U-S. You write, Akbar Ahmed, that much of American popular is the object of both fascination and revulsion and that it’s seductive for people and that’s in large part why it bothers them so much.

Ahmed: Yes, it’s complex. It’s contradictory. The paradox is here. A lot of people are seduced and revulsed at the same time. That is why the sub-title of my book is “Living Dangerously in a Post-Honor World” because very often they feel their culture, their honor is being threatened by these images from outside which are alien. And yet a lot of the young generation is seduced by these images. And that is why I believe that the word that has been missing in our discussion and that is so important to bring these cultures together, the last word in my book is the word “compassion.” That compassion which is common to our cultures, Western culture, Islamic culture, that needs to be emphasized again and again because if that doesn’t happen, then these great gaps that exist between America and the Muslim world, these gaps will continue to widen and we have to be very careful about that. Host: What do you mean by the application of compassion in practice? Let’s say -- you talk about the need for democracy in the Muslim world. Is compassion instrumental in achieving that?

Ahmed: Absolutely. Compassion means understanding. The first step is to understand the other. So you’re looking at the Muslim world, you need to understand Muslim customs, culture, history, religion. Now, if, as has unfortunately happened over the last two years, the Prophet of Islam is being abused, the God of Islam is being abused, the religion of Islam is being abused -- it has been called a wicked and evil religion -- now that means simply that there is no compassion. There is no understanding. And then it is not difficult to ask “Why are people angry in the Muslim world.”

Host: Though, is it understood in the Muslim world that when some individuals who are able to get on television in the U-S would say something like “It’s a wicked religion,” that that’s not someone representing the majority of America?

Ahmed: It is a great tragedy. In this atmosphere of distrust, it isn’t understood. So the average Muslim will simply see an American abusing the Prophet of Islam. And he will then see the war on terror as a war on Islam. It is exactly the reverse of many Americans identifying those nineteen hijackers on September 11th as all Muslims. There are a lot of Americans who think that all Muslims are like this: “Muslims, young Muslims, male Muslims must be potential terrorists and hijackers.” It’s the same kind of stereotype in reverse and that’s very dangerous because, as you said very rightly, this is a free society in America, a democratic society. People have the right to say what they want to say, but the impact this is having on the Muslim world, I can tell you is devastating. At a time when we need to win the minds and hearts of the Muslim people, these statements are causing a lot of hurt and a lot of anger.

Host: Louay Safi, is there some way to increase understanding in the Muslim world that individuals saying what they want to say in the U-S is not necessarily indicative of the majority opinion in the U-S or government policy?

Safi: Well, I tend to think that of course when we’re talking about the Muslim world, we’re talking about a very huge area. But I can tell you that now in the last at least five or six years there has been more freedom in Indonesia and at least within the Arab world and I’m sure also in other parts of the Muslim world. Now people there get information. There are debates. There are discussions and they know that this person does not represent the U-S government. The problem is this adds to the total portrait and that ultimately people judge by looking at the whole thing. For example, people see themselves losing freedom, losing power to dictatorial regimes while the West is gaining more freedom. They see themselves impoverished while the West is getting wealthier. And so they see those patterns and they attribute that to Western support of dictatorial regimes in the Muslim world. And that’s why it’s very vital for us to change our approach and support the democratic movements in the Muslim world, even if these movements have certain elements of Islam, because Islam, as Professor Akbar Ahmed has pointed out, has felt under siege. And Muslims see themselves through the prism of Islam. I mean, Islam is not only a religion for Muslims, it’s a civilization, it’s a whole history that defines who they are.

Host: Tamara Sonn, is there a role for the U-S and other Western countries to play in promoting greater freedom in the Muslim world? And can’t that have the effect though of being seen to be meddling in the culture and the lives of the people in the Muslim world?

Sonn: Well, that’s an excellent question and I think that you’ve identified the issue, whether or not we’re perceived to be meddling in the Muslim world. But the fact is, it would be difficult for us to deny that the perception that Muslims now have is that we are meddling in the Muslim world. Clearly we have occupied Iraq. We’re fighting a war in Afghanistan, an ongoing war in Afghanistan, but we also are very closely allied to the Saudi government, to the Egyptian government, to the Jordanian government. And in many cases, those governments are not perceived to be democratic, so that our alliance with those governments is seen as support for non-democratic regimes. So, yes, we definitely have a role to play. We are involved, whether it’s perceived to be meddling or not, I don’t think is the issue now, if we choose to shift our emphasis from alliance with governments that we consider to be secure or pro-Western to alliance with governments that are in fact democratic and I think in that sense we could make a very, very significant difference, not only in our perception, but in the reality in the Muslim world.

Host: Akbar Ahmed, whether push comes to shove in the West or from within Muslim countries for democratic change and the freedoms that come with that -- you talk a lot in your book about the way in which social change, fast-paced social change is perceived as a threat to traditional societies. If you now have in countries that have not been democratic, have not been free, a move toward democracy, doesn’t that then promote the kind of social change that you write about being the cause of so many problems in the first place?

Ahmed: You’re right -- again a paradox, again contradictions here. At the same time, democracy has a momentum. You can not stop it. Now it’s assumed in the West that democracy is a new phenomenon in the Muslim world, that it never took root. That’s not correct. In South Asia in the 1920s and 30s the largest, most important Muslim political movement took place. And that was the movement for creation of Pakistan. And it was led by Mr. [Mohammad Ali] Jinnah, who embodied democracy. He believed in human rights, women’s rights, minority rights. He had the constitution. He was the embodiment of a democrat, Westminster-trained, Lincoln’s [admirer] and so on. So you have an indigenous, authentic local model and the result is that in South Asia, in spite of all the problems, in spite of marshal law from time to time, Pakistan has struggled for democracy. Bangladesh has struggled for democracy. You’ve had female prime ministers. In Indonesia you have a president who’s a female. So you have an ongoing attempt at democracy. The West has to see it, identify it and support it unequivocally, whoever comes in. And let this process be repeated so that eventually, Muslims are able to participate. That sense of frustration must be minimized. If that doesn’t happen then the pent-up fury will be directed at America.

Host: I’m afraid we have about thirty seconds left. Mr. Safi do you think that democratic change is going to relieve that frustration?

Safi: Definitely. I think there is a sense of helplessness and a sense of lack of control within the Muslim world. People feel that they have no ability to decide palaces. If we can bring, or if we can allow the people to bring democracy without opposing it or supporting dictators, then I think that will take us a long way to address even the very difficult [issue] of terrorism. [crosstalk]

Host: I’m afraid that’s going to have to be the last word for today, we’re out of time. I’d like to thank my guests: Akbar Ahmed of American University; Louay Safi of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy; and joining us by phone, Tamara Sonn of William and Mary College. Before we go, I’d like to invite you to send us your questions and comments. You can e-mail them to Ontheline@ibb.gov For On the Line, I’m Eric Felten.

You can view the manuscript of the entire program at the Vice of America-