Al Qaeda, and the Nation State
As I read through my earlier posts in my surfeit of extra time, I notice that I continually describe some Islamist movements (Hamas, Hizbollah) as broadly though not universally popular and responsive to modern Muslims' seething discontent at the current global political and economic order, and others (AlQaeda in particular) as being far less popular, though of course it bathes in these same angry waters. I thought I'd attempt an explanation for why I think AlQaeda hasn't been quite as successful at earning the broad popularity of the Muslim world.
I think there are a few reasons. First of all, one NON-reason is September 11. Anyone who is remotely attracted to Islamist movements is far more likely to believe that Jews caused September 11 than Bin Laden. Seriously. The more popular view in the Middle East is that 9/11 was some diabolical ploy by Mossad to destroy Islam, and the war on terror is a ruse to achieve that too. So you can't really look to 9/11 as the reason Muslims might recoil from Al Qaeda.
So what's left? Well first I think there is the reality that jihad, and Islam, are intimately tied in the modern world to the nation state. Hamas and Hizbollah are very artful in the way they craft a message that draws on national liberation as well as religious appeal. It's a nationalist resistance and an Islamic jihad, never one or the other. By contrast, these Qaeda types don't seem to recognize countries, which makes them a little weird and out of place I think to most Muslims. When they do tie themselves to particular nations or try to enter their politics through their links to tribes, as in Pakistan, they seem to fail because of their perceived distance from the interests of the nation state. (Though I should say if you really want to understand Pakistan don't listen to me, Anil Kalhan is your man, his blog posts on Michael Dorf's blog are really spectacular).
I know some law professors are out there telling us all of the imminent destruction of the nation state and how the world is so interconnected and globalized and even the terrorist movements are like that now. I just wonder if they're jet setting too much with the folks the Fox News people call the latte drinking crowd. Most people aren't nearly so divorced from their nations and nationalism, not here in the US and not in the Muslim world and all of this talk of the demise of the nation state and the rise of pan-national networks seems, well, wildly overstated. That Shi'a Hezbollah can successfully earn Sunni support for its nationalist tinged jihad where Sunni Al Qaeda can't get traction in Pakistan to me helps show that.
And the other reason seems to me that they're doing a little too much killing and not much else. Hamas and Hizbollah tie their programs to social networks and claim, implausibly, but anyway, that their vision will bring a better world. And people buy into it given the other services they give. So they buy the claim that all progress requires is getting rid of Israel and American influence, all of this really simplistic Manichean nonsense where all problems stem from one source gains wide traction. They offer stuff and claim they could give more if Israel and America let Islam be, and you're some poor Palestinian goat farmer and you know Suha Arafat is sitting in France with billions and the only dude offering to send your kid to school is Hamas, and the sale starts to work. And don't think Arab news isn't filled with stories of Hamas and Hezbollah funded social programs and home building ventures and whatnot. Believe me, it is. It adds to their regional image.
But the thing is, if you talk that talk, you do have to walk that walk. Everyone knows the Qaeda folks don't actually bomb very much in Israel or US troops in Saudi or whatever other colonialist venture they can dream up (on that subject, where is Otani? Anyone know? Bin Laden refers to that a few times as another example of the West massacring Muslims, and I can't figure out what he's talking about, google searches turn up steak and seafood restaurants), and they don't do much building either. Their blessed though independently operating franchise in Iraq once led by Abu Musab alZarqawi surged a bit in Iraq and got them more popularity inthe Muslim world, not through building but through killing "occupiers", but they then stopped bombing US troops as much (it's harder) and turned on other targets. Killing Shi'is is a favorite pasttime, during Shi'i commemorations in Shi'i mosques. Just this week there was a massive example of this. Jordanian weddings was another. And there is a point at which people sort of look at this and wonder what the hell any of this has to do with improving the lot of the Muslim world by ousting the colonialists. You're just bombing mosques and weddings. You haven't helped anyone.
Weddings and mosques are the good things people want to see more of, as well as good schools and universities. They want a better life, they are getting a worse one, and that's upsetting them, but bombing a wedding hardly seems like much of a solution, even to someone who has decided the problem is America, Israel and "collaborators", as so many Muslims have.
Of course with the rage up at this fever pitch and Al Qaeda recruiting heavily, you're always going to have some spill over to this really extreme form of nihilism that Al Qaeda represents. But for the most part, I think their readings of Muslim foundational text are and will for the most part remain marginal, the Islamist call for resistance to the West and the ingraining of that into so much of the shari'a (see so many earlier posts for that) is strong, but not to the point of sanctioning all of this sort of destruction without any semblance of an accompanying positive vision. I think their day is waning, though political Islam seems to be as strong as it has ever been, which I suppose is not very encouraging to the Muslim liberals of the world. But it leaves plenty to talk about here.
HAH
I think there are a few reasons. First of all, one NON-reason is September 11. Anyone who is remotely attracted to Islamist movements is far more likely to believe that Jews caused September 11 than Bin Laden. Seriously. The more popular view in the Middle East is that 9/11 was some diabolical ploy by Mossad to destroy Islam, and the war on terror is a ruse to achieve that too. So you can't really look to 9/11 as the reason Muslims might recoil from Al Qaeda.
So what's left? Well first I think there is the reality that jihad, and Islam, are intimately tied in the modern world to the nation state. Hamas and Hizbollah are very artful in the way they craft a message that draws on national liberation as well as religious appeal. It's a nationalist resistance and an Islamic jihad, never one or the other. By contrast, these Qaeda types don't seem to recognize countries, which makes them a little weird and out of place I think to most Muslims. When they do tie themselves to particular nations or try to enter their politics through their links to tribes, as in Pakistan, they seem to fail because of their perceived distance from the interests of the nation state. (Though I should say if you really want to understand Pakistan don't listen to me, Anil Kalhan is your man, his blog posts on Michael Dorf's blog are really spectacular).
I know some law professors are out there telling us all of the imminent destruction of the nation state and how the world is so interconnected and globalized and even the terrorist movements are like that now. I just wonder if they're jet setting too much with the folks the Fox News people call the latte drinking crowd. Most people aren't nearly so divorced from their nations and nationalism, not here in the US and not in the Muslim world and all of this talk of the demise of the nation state and the rise of pan-national networks seems, well, wildly overstated. That Shi'a Hezbollah can successfully earn Sunni support for its nationalist tinged jihad where Sunni Al Qaeda can't get traction in Pakistan to me helps show that.
And the other reason seems to me that they're doing a little too much killing and not much else. Hamas and Hizbollah tie their programs to social networks and claim, implausibly, but anyway, that their vision will bring a better world. And people buy into it given the other services they give. So they buy the claim that all progress requires is getting rid of Israel and American influence, all of this really simplistic Manichean nonsense where all problems stem from one source gains wide traction. They offer stuff and claim they could give more if Israel and America let Islam be, and you're some poor Palestinian goat farmer and you know Suha Arafat is sitting in France with billions and the only dude offering to send your kid to school is Hamas, and the sale starts to work. And don't think Arab news isn't filled with stories of Hamas and Hezbollah funded social programs and home building ventures and whatnot. Believe me, it is. It adds to their regional image.
But the thing is, if you talk that talk, you do have to walk that walk. Everyone knows the Qaeda folks don't actually bomb very much in Israel or US troops in Saudi or whatever other colonialist venture they can dream up (on that subject, where is Otani? Anyone know? Bin Laden refers to that a few times as another example of the West massacring Muslims, and I can't figure out what he's talking about, google searches turn up steak and seafood restaurants), and they don't do much building either. Their blessed though independently operating franchise in Iraq once led by Abu Musab alZarqawi surged a bit in Iraq and got them more popularity inthe Muslim world, not through building but through killing "occupiers", but they then stopped bombing US troops as much (it's harder) and turned on other targets. Killing Shi'is is a favorite pasttime, during Shi'i commemorations in Shi'i mosques. Just this week there was a massive example of this. Jordanian weddings was another. And there is a point at which people sort of look at this and wonder what the hell any of this has to do with improving the lot of the Muslim world by ousting the colonialists. You're just bombing mosques and weddings. You haven't helped anyone.
Weddings and mosques are the good things people want to see more of, as well as good schools and universities. They want a better life, they are getting a worse one, and that's upsetting them, but bombing a wedding hardly seems like much of a solution, even to someone who has decided the problem is America, Israel and "collaborators", as so many Muslims have.
Of course with the rage up at this fever pitch and Al Qaeda recruiting heavily, you're always going to have some spill over to this really extreme form of nihilism that Al Qaeda represents. But for the most part, I think their readings of Muslim foundational text are and will for the most part remain marginal, the Islamist call for resistance to the West and the ingraining of that into so much of the shari'a (see so many earlier posts for that) is strong, but not to the point of sanctioning all of this sort of destruction without any semblance of an accompanying positive vision. I think their day is waning, though political Islam seems to be as strong as it has ever been, which I suppose is not very encouraging to the Muslim liberals of the world. But it leaves plenty to talk about here.
HAH
Severalo things here. First, I wish you happiness with your marriage. That is brave. Next, I wish to say that beyond Hussian, freedom always comes at a price. I would rather leave Iraq and let the fundamentalists rule. Too bad for the women though. Israel has no choice but to fight...or be pushed into the sea. The lessons to be learned in the Middle East are ignored by all the players. religion is just a disguise...its greed and power as usual and uneducated, uninformed, and guliable people will always buy into the canned bull.The story in the middle east keeps being replayed over and over again in various forms all over the world. So sorry that religions fan those fires.
Reply to this