Islamic fundamentalism: The supply-side
I doubt that anyone, at this point, believes that the Bush administration's anti-terrorism response has done much to make the world safer. A they-hate-our-way-of-life attitude can be accepted only in a country where a third of the population has passports, and does dangerous injustice to a serious geo-political problem. This is why the recent London and Egypt bombings have nudged the world into considering actual ways of tackling Islamic terrorism. Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria appeared on the Daily Show last week, and I think he has it wrong on at least one count.
He cites the example of Asian muslim countries, where Islamic political parties fail to get any more than 5% of the votes, as evidence of improvements in the Islamic world. I agree that the populous core of Asian Islam practices a much more benevolent form of the religion than in the Middle East. However, his analysis makes sense only if things are getting better, not if things are as they've always been. Just for his information, Bangladesh has never been a politically muslim country. The Islamic parties, which harbor many that were involved in ignominious treachery during the War of Liberation, have always garnered a small percentage of votes during national elections. I would actually say that the influx of fundamentalist money from Saudi Arabia is actually making the religious atmosphere worse in the country. Global safety has become threatened by this viral ideology, and there is no room for complacency. Even Asian muslim countries should be on their guard against the constant outreach from Saudi Arabian ideologues.
Zakaria also addressed the question of demand or supply. The most tangible target would be the supply side of terrorism, although not in the callous, bumbling, opportunistic way the Bush Administration is lashing out at every country but Saudi Arabia. Even when there is no demand, supply will create some. Advertising is in endless supply, specially with the Palestinian conflict set to continue forever. Western countries could be a little less hypocritical and use their demand-side power in the oil market to induce reform and development in the Middle Eastern countries. It would also really help if they stopped meddling in their internal affairs altogether. Above all, the Western leaders should start showing some respect for muslims as people, and acknowledge that too many of today's global problems are remnants of yesterday's colonial instrusions (see Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir). It is too late now to stand by and observe. The Western leaders will have to meddle some more to put some things right. I feel that when the supply of fundamentalist ideology is struck, by helping these countries achieve reform and development themselves, demand will fizzle out on its own. And maybe then the disgruntled muslim youth will deal with not belonging in society, just like the rest of us, by doing drugs and cutting themselves.
He cites the example of Asian muslim countries, where Islamic political parties fail to get any more than 5% of the votes, as evidence of improvements in the Islamic world. I agree that the populous core of Asian Islam practices a much more benevolent form of the religion than in the Middle East. However, his analysis makes sense only if things are getting better, not if things are as they've always been. Just for his information, Bangladesh has never been a politically muslim country. The Islamic parties, which harbor many that were involved in ignominious treachery during the War of Liberation, have always garnered a small percentage of votes during national elections. I would actually say that the influx of fundamentalist money from Saudi Arabia is actually making the religious atmosphere worse in the country. Global safety has become threatened by this viral ideology, and there is no room for complacency. Even Asian muslim countries should be on their guard against the constant outreach from Saudi Arabian ideologues.
Zakaria also addressed the question of demand or supply. The most tangible target would be the supply side of terrorism, although not in the callous, bumbling, opportunistic way the Bush Administration is lashing out at every country but Saudi Arabia. Even when there is no demand, supply will create some. Advertising is in endless supply, specially with the Palestinian conflict set to continue forever. Western countries could be a little less hypocritical and use their demand-side power in the oil market to induce reform and development in the Middle Eastern countries. It would also really help if they stopped meddling in their internal affairs altogether. Above all, the Western leaders should start showing some respect for muslims as people, and acknowledge that too many of today's global problems are remnants of yesterday's colonial instrusions (see Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir). It is too late now to stand by and observe. The Western leaders will have to meddle some more to put some things right. I feel that when the supply of fundamentalist ideology is struck, by helping these countries achieve reform and development themselves, demand will fizzle out on its own. And maybe then the disgruntled muslim youth will deal with not belonging in society, just like the rest of us, by doing drugs and cutting themselves.
posted by No You're Not at 9:16 PM
2 comments
