Home > 2008 Issues > June 08, 2008

Terror as a trump weapon of jehad By Prafull Goradia The bomb blasts at Jaipur are, above all, acts of cowardice whereby the perpetrators were anonymous and their victims were innocent women, children as well as men. Muslims have generally followed the example and exhortations of Prophet Muhammad. He fought many a battle and most often led the troops himself. Little wonder that his lead inspired the conquest of North Africa and Spain in one direction and through Iraq and Iran as far as Afghanistan and Sindh in the other; all in a matter of a century. It did not take very long for Islam to reach heartland India and go all the way to Indonesia. In the course of 14 centuries, from zero the Muslim population has become the second largest in the world at 21 per cent. The Indian subcontinent today has 40 per cent which was a mere 10 per cent in late Mughal times. Evidently, expansion was the name of the Islamic game: conquer more and more territories and have more and more Muslims. While expansion was the end, exploitation of nature as well as people was the means. With the petro-dollars earned, no Muslim country is yet an industrial power. The ummah?s record of modern education as well as the treatment of women is far from laudable. At the same time, a typical Muslim, whether a soldier or a civilian, is not known to be a coward. On the contrary, he is happy to die in a holy war. Bombs are surreptitiously placed, whether on bicycles or trains, and tuned to burst when and where thousands of innocents are expected to gather. Slaughter of all including women and children who are least concerned with either Islam or jehad. Then the terrorist does not disclose his identity and remains in hiding. What could be more cowardly? The next question is: how do the blasts like that in Jaipur on May 13, 2008 or that in Hyderabad on August 25, 2007 or those on the suburban trains of Mumbai on July 11, 2006 help Islam to expand? Expansion, we have noted, is the hallmark of Allah?s religion. On the contrary, the barbarism of blasts must put people off. A non-believer, not averse to becoming a Muslim, would change his mind and stay away from the purveyors of cowardly violence. The purpose of jehad is to either protect or promote Islam. Since the religion is not under threat, it needs no special protection. Since terrorism cannot attract people to becoming Muslim, the blasts do not promote the religion. How then do the blasts add up to jehad or holy war? Nor can terrorism help to extend the territory of a Muslim country. How is it jehad? And yet all the mujahids believe that they are fighting a jehad. If they survive, they reserve a place in jannat after qayamat. If they die, they become shaheeds and proceed straight to jannat without any waiting. Let us presume that the average mujahid is immature and misguided. Assume that he is tempted by the titillating promise of heavenly life. But what about the vast masses of sensible Muslims? Why do they not speak up against the barbarism of the bombs and the blasts? Assume that the average person is mute and a helpless bystander of events. What about their representatives and leaders like the ulema? Why do they not speak up? Probably, the ulema believe in all seriousness that the bomb blast is a trump weapon of jehad. And therefore cannot be condemned. Even if he is not sure, no momin would ever question any part of a holy war. Fair enough, but what about the western educated Muslim? Does his heart not go out to the butchered innocents, their widows and orphans? Does his mind not think that terrorism vitiates the future of Islam? Already, it is clear that the USA is at war against the Islamists. Europe had forgotten the Moorish conquest of Spain in 711 AD and the Turkish attacks which came near to capturing Vienna in 1529 and again in 1683 AD. And then the centuries of east European tussle with the Ottoman empire; the large-scale conversions of the Christians of Bosnia Herzegovina, Kosovo, Albania et al. Yes, Europeans were largely asleep on the issue. Those awake considered it politically incorrect to oppose Islamism. The series of terrorist attacks beginning with the Munich Olympics in 1972 rekindled the mood of the Crusades fought centuries ago. But for terrorism, countries like France, Holland, Belgium and Germany would not have realised how the demographic growth of Muslims was a threat. How gradually Europe was turning into Eurabia? Had the danger of Islamist expansion not been apprehended, Turkey might have slipped into the European Union. That would have meant the spontaneous addition of 80 million Muslims into a Europe whose Christian population is declining. The attacks in Moscow, Beslan and other places have shaken up the Russians also. Having been brought up as atheistic communists, religion might not be on the Russian minds. Here Muslims were multiplying while the Christians were reducing in numbers. Moscow today is 25 per cent Muslim! Terrorism is thus an enemy of Islam. Yet, few Muslims are prepared to condemn the massacre of innocent people. Is it that petro-money and muscle dominate the psyche of the followers of Islam? Or, has anger overtaken self-interest as a priority of the ulema? (The writer can be contacted at, 145 Sunder Nagar, New Delhi-110 003.)

Previous Page (11/33) - Next Page (13/33)