Conflict, Terrorism, & Jihad

By Yamin Zakaria

The book primarily covers the subject of conflict between the West and the Muslim world. It gives a concise view providing a simple entry point for the readers to this vast subject, and with the varied topics, it will be informative and interesting for the reader. It starts by examining the causes of conflict and the various related issues. The book also delves into the historical factors that have created the fault lines in the Middle East and aided the rise of Political Islam. Controversial subjects are addressed; the role of civilians in warfare and asks are they innocent, analyses the media propaganda regarding Jihad and suicide bombers, finally it examines the violent response of some homegrown Muslims to Western foreign policy.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris UK
• Release date: Feb 27, 2017
• ISBN: 9781524596095

Yamin Zakaria

The author is a British Educated Muslim, graduate in Chemistry from London University, currently works as an IT Professional, married with five children. He frequently comments on various issues related to the Islamic world (www.radicalviews.org). His articles in the past have appeared in numerous websites and newspapers, particularly in the Islamic World. He has been involved with various Islamic movements from his University days and was an active member of Hizb-Ut-Tahrir until 2002. Since that time the author has become an independent commentator, and some regard him as controversial for expressing his views candidly. However, with the passage of time and the unfolding of various events from the Arab Spring to the rise of ISIS, his opinions have become more representative of mainstream Muslims in the West.

Book preview

Copyright © 2017 by Yamin Zakaria.

ISBN:      Softcover      978-1-5245-9608-8

                eBook           978-1-5245-9609-5

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 02/23/2017

Xlibris

800-056-3182

www.Xlibrispublishing.co.uk

516149

CONTENTS

Introduction

CONFLICT

Chapter 1 Causes of War: The Clash of Values and Interests

Chapter 2 Brief History of the Middle East Fault Lines

Chapter 3 Rise of Islamism

Chapter 4 Onslaught by Yellow Journalism

TERRORISM AND SUICIDE BOMBING

Chapter 5 A Brief History of Terrorism

Chapter 6 The Problem of Defining Terrorism

Chapter 7 Evaluating Terrorism

Chapter 8 Are Suicide Bombers Neo-terrorists?

Chapter 9 Popular Myths Surrounding Suicide (Human) Bombers

WAR AND JIHAD

Chapter 10 What Is Not Jihad

Chapter 11 Characteristics of Warfare

Chapter 12 Are Civilians Innocent?

Chapter 13 The Islamic Position on Killing Civilians

Chapter 14 Jihad in the West and the Covenant of Peace

Final Thoughts

INTRODUCTION

Conflicts, great and small, have occurred throughout human history. Personal feuds, the desire for land and wealth, conflicting ideologies, and maintaining the balance of power with rivals are some of the many reasons why villages, tribes, and entire nations have gone to war. In times of peace, the idea of going into battle appears abhorrent as it conjures up images of destruction, pillaging, and bloodshed, especially in contemporary times, as our capabilities to inflict carnage and devastation have increased substantially through advances in science and technology. Nevertheless, repeatedly, armies have been ordered to pick up their weapons and march into battle, while more often than not, the civilians on either side provide moral, economic, and various other forms of support, allowing the conflict to continue until there is a clear victory or acceptance of defeat.

Our modern age bears witness to a constant string of increasingly globalised conflicts. With the demise of communism, a seemingly new battle line has emerged between the Christian West and the Muslim East, the people of the Orient (Moyen-Orient). A little re-visiting of the history books will show that this war is not so new after all and goes back to the 7th Century. That was the time of the Muslim conquest of Spain, Egypt, Syria, and Jerusalem, and the subsequent Crusades led by the Christian powers of Europe.

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in 2001, the tension between the Muslims and the West became more pronounced, particularly for those Muslims living as minorities within the Western borders. President George W. Bush responded by launching the so-called ‘War on Terror’. From the pulpit of the White House, he proclaimed that Muslims needed saving from the ideology of al-Qaeda and that would be achieved primarily through the imposition of freedom and democracy in the Muslim world. The critics responded by asking if that would include countries like Saudi Arabia, which is symbolically the centre of the Muslim world for it controlled the two of the holiest places (Makkah and Madina).

From the numerous speeches and headlines the US gave the impression that its foreign policy was motivated by good will as if it were a benevolent state, rather than a profit-making, self-centered capitalist entity. Following the decimation of al-Qaeda, a new adversary has emerged, the so-called Caliphate of ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). Islamism (political Islam) is the new ideological enemy.

I have decided to examine this theme of conflict with a particular focus on the Arab-Muslim world that President Bush sought to transform. Some of you may already know me as a commentator on this issue, having, in the past, been a former member of the Muslim group Hizb-ut-Tahrir, and authored the book Suicide Bombings: Jihad or Terrorism? As entertaining as some of my past commentary may have been, I am no longer that emotional individual, ready to shoot off angry words against my country of citizenship and view the world in black and white. Time and experience have given me a more balanced perspective, and while I hope that you continue to enjoy my point of view on issues of controversy, you will most certainly see how the years have changed my outlook.

My intention is to examine the issues dispassionately. I begin this journey by examining the factors that contribute to conflict in general, followed by an analysis of the political instability in the Middle East, as well as looking at another major factor in recent conflict, media propaganda, with its daily spin.

Indeed, spin is the prerogative of our mass media, and while news channels and other current affairs outlets report on the situation in real time, they play a significant long-term role in shaping our ideas and influencing the way in which we view warfare. Hence, the war of ideas always accompanies the physical battle, particularly within democratic societies, where the consent of the masses matters. Accordingly, as a means of gaining, or even some would say, manufacturing this consent, the media has become extremely pronounced in justifying war and rallying the nation behind their government.

The ever-growing role of the mass media is further boosted by the rapid growth of the online media, which is readily accessible through the Internet. The major broadcasting corporations all have their fans on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and one no longer needs to turn on the television or buy a newspaper to have access to live news and analysis from a particular perspective.

Despite this new possibility for the purveyors of mainstream news items, the real effect of social media, as the name suggests, is that everyday people can voice their opinion. Anyone, anywhere, can contribute to the shaping of views by using various methods; such as posting videos on YouTube, writing articles on blogging sites, or simply by updating shareable social media statuses, thereby spreading their particular message instantly to millions. The buzz word for this is ‘going viral’.

The reality is that, although tribal nomads may now access the BBC online, the rise of social media is undermining the monopoly once held by the corporate media. In 2015, mainstream media channels attempted to paint the Chapel Hill shooting, where three Muslims were murdered in cold blood by an Islamophobic atheist, as a minor parking dispute, and this was after they were forced to acknowledge the incident. Social media activity, however, portrayed the story as members of the public saw it: a vicious crime motivated by an irrational hatred towards Muslims.

The power of such online channels goes beyond mere opinion shaping, for it has played a significant role in uniting people to take action against the government and its corporate media. Its role in igniting the Arab Spring is undeniable, as it united and informed an oppressed people by encouraging open discussion in a deregulated environment. This process contributed to toppling some of the dictators, who attempted to control the people through their media channels in several Middle Eastern countries.

Social media, with speed and simplicity, connects the masses around the world, which is just one sign of the global village, first prophesied by media expert Professor Marshall McLuhan in the 1960s. In this era of globalisation, individuals move freely around the world for work and recreational purposes; nations have become interdependent, and they work collectively through the various regional and international organisations. Therefore, along with domestic public opinion, the need to influence international opinion is a major factor to consider. For that reason, government and corporate media will persist in trying to win the hearts and minds of audiences at home and abroad.

Conflict usually manifests in full-scale wars between nations or asymmetric conflicts between states and non-state actors. A hybrid model would involve countries fighting via proxy, employing non-state actors. Where the conflict involves non-state actors, allegations of terrorism swiftly follow. Despite the lack of consensus on the definition of terrorism, I have decided to examine the common characteristics embedded in the various interpretations given to this highly subjective term to provide insight. Indeed, decades of state-led propaganda have conditioned our minds to see terrorism exclusively as a heinous crime performed solely by individuals and groups. The opposing view is that they are freedom fighters engaged in a legitimate struggle for their rights, similar to the French Resistance operating against the Nazis or the Palestinians struggling today to regain a small portion of their homeland. The contention over the definition of terrorism and its application makes the term highly subjective; hence, I have proposed the need for some objective measurement of episodes of terrorism and conflict.

A feature of most asymmetric conflicts is the use of suicide bombings, and the state and corporate media frighteningly portrays this. Over the years, the media has generated various propaganda myths about suicide bombers that have clouded the subject, and I have analysed these media myths. Given that many suicide bombers are from the Islamic world, what is the Islamic legal perspective on this controversial issue is something that I have already discussed in my other book Suicide Bombings: Jihad or Terrorism?. The second edition of this book is due for release shortly, which will contain substantial additions.

Moving from asymmetric wars to conventional state warfare, I have discussed the reality of Jihad led by Islamic powers in the past, with a cursory comparison to capitalist wars. Under the current climate of Islamophobia, the narrative is, jihad is the product of an extremist interpretation of Islamic text that promotes an unhealthy desire to kill all infidels’, and ISIS is the perfect example. It is unsurprising that most people are unaware that in the past, jihad was a means to spread the message of Islam by bringing as many people as possible into the fold of Islam, and killing them would contradict that objective. Although the goals and intentions of Jihad are very different from other types of war, all conflicts do share common characteristics, and only by looking at the similarities between Jihad and modern state warfare, as well as their fundamental differences, can we gain a better understanding of these situations.

There is no shortage of contentious topics associated with conflict, and I explore that of killing civilians, assumed innocent, due to their status as non-combatants. What is the exact line between combatants and non-combatants in the context of modern warfare, since many civilians do aid the war effort in various ways? Our modern methods of warfare, involving powerful explosives and air raids, mean that the task of distinguishing combatants and non-combatants is rendered impossible, and perhaps the innocent status that we often religiously ascribe to civilians is academic. This idea is an uncomfortable thing for you, the reader, to hear, and so I encourage you to read the relevant chapters to gain an understanding of my arguments. Whether you agree with my perspective or not, I hope that I have shed some light on the status of non-combatants in warfare.

Seeing as the Islamic world is the focus of conflict, I have presented not only the general argument, which questions the notion that their civilians are less innocent than ours, but I have also explored the Islamic position on the subject