On September the 11th an incredibly brutal terrorist attack shook the ‎world out of its benign neglect. It awakened the West to the dangerous ‎phenomenon of Islamic revivalism or fundamentalism, a phenomenon ‎that first showed its destructive potential in the Iranian Islamic ‎Revolution. ‎

We can call this phenomenon either revivalism or fundamentalism, ‎since both imply a return to a golden past. The term Islamism is also ‎used in this respect, covering all totalitarian tendencies wanting an ‎Islamic social and political order based on the example of the Prophet ‎and early Caliphs and enforced by all means. The origins of the Islamic ‎Revivalism goes back to late 18th century Arabia, where a certain ‎Abdolvahhab, tried to relive, almost to the letter, the life and ‎achievements of the prophet. With his message of pure Islam, Islam ‎according to Qor’an, and as manifested in the prophet’s words and ‎deeds, he set out to conquer Arabia and bring his pure Vahhabi Islam to ‎the Islamic world. After some spectacular victories, he was defeated by ‎the Egyptian surrogates of the Ottoman Sultan; but his message ‎survived and a century later led to the establishment of the Saudi ‎Kingdom. It is by no means accidental that Bin Laden, another Vahhabi ‎from the same land, is now the most prominent representative of that ‎message.‎

The two characteristics of Islamic revivalism apart from going back to ‎the pure Islam of its prophet, is unbounded enmity towards the West, ‎and a devotion to violence. West is considered the source of evil in the ‎world, dominating and corrupting Muslims. Its power should be ‎crushed by all means, terrorism and genocide included. ‎

From Abdol-vahhab’s defeat in early ninetieth century, the Islamic ‎revivalism experienced more and more setbacks. Al Mahdi in Sudan ‎was similarly defeated by superior western arms; various terrorist ‎groups, notably Akhvan in Egypt and Fadayian in Iran, were largely ‎eliminated. Nevertheless, it remained the most influential movement in ‎Islam, helping to misguide and frustrate various Islamic societies in ‎their efforts to modernize. It kept alive the illusion of Islam’s intrinsic ‎superiority to western civilization, and by hindering freethinking--Islam ‎as The Taboo-- strengthened authoritarian tendencies. The golden age ‎of Islam as a paradigm condemned all modernizing efforts in these ‎societies to half measures and damaging compromises.‎

‎ Islam in government and as a political philosophy had proven its ‎inadequacy from the beginning. It undoubtedly made the Arabs one of ‎history’s most successful conquerors and colonizers. (V.C. Naipaul has a ‎strong point calling Arab colonialism the most complete, because it ‎makes colonized people not only ignorant about, but hostile towards, ‎their pre-colonial heritage.) However, it failed from the very start in ‎creating a real community. Islamic societies continued living in ‎despotism, exploitation and insecurity. After the vitality of the first ‎centuries --fed by military might--wore down, Islam with its claim over ‎all aspects of human existence, its dogmas and rigidity, became the ‎greatest cause of backwardness.‎

For the Islamic revivalists of various schools, the answer for ‎backwardness has ironically been to go further backward. Abdol-wahab ‎and Al Mahdi were defeated not because of their anachronism, but for ‎lack of firearms, so Islam should acquire western means, and regain ‎both its purity and superior place. This mechanical approach to the ‎problem of backwardness and development, from mid 20th century ‎came under the strong influence of “Third Worldism” and Marxism, ‎and became the mainstream ideology of Muslim intelligentsia --the vast ‎army of half educated and unemployable. Whatever it lacked in hatred ‎towards Western values of freedom and human rights, it took from ‎those bankrupt ideologies.‎

The single greatest impetus given to the Islamic revivalism, was the ‎Islamic Revolution in Iran. Almost like the Muslim conquest of Iran in ‎‎7th century, the triumph of the revivalists in a country that was leading ‎the Muslim world in economic and social development and was ‎becoming a model for many of them, created a tremendous momentum. ‎Iran’s wealth and power, hand in hand with revolutionary élan, enabled ‎the ruling Islamic clergy to set the agenda for the new phase of Islamic ‎revivalism. Exporting revolution became a new slogan for the old ‎revivalist dream, and state sponsored terrorism and virulent anti ‎Western propaganda its 1nstrument. The Islamic republic started by ‎hostage taking of the American diplomats and went so far as placing ‎weapons in diplomatic mailbags, sending armed men among Hajj ‎pilgrims, and turn its embassies into centers of revolutionary activity. ‎

Another great boost for Islamic revivalism was the anti Soviet war in ‎Afghanistn. Although US support was crucial, their triumphalism ‎reached new highs after that. As Abdol Aziz Azzam, one of Bin Ladin’s ‎teachers at King Abdol Aziz University taught his students, if an infidel ‎state could be defeated, all others could be likewise. Here we come to ‎another source of this resurgent movement, the oil ( mostly Saudi ) ‎money. Saudi official western oriented policy notwithstanding, this ‎country, run as a family gas station, is the main sponsor of Islamic ‎extremist groups around the world. The Vahhabi clergy that has a free ‎hand in all matters religious, has huge sums augmented by donations ‎from some members of the 7000 strong royal family for revivalist ‎propaganda. They support innumerable religious institutions from ‎mosques to schools, the so-called Madreseh, to charities. Of such ‎schools there are 40,000 in Pakistan alone, many of them benefiting ‎from Saudi largesse.‎

The above quote from Azzam was just a random one. In most Arab and ‎many Islamic countries the whole educational system and media is anti ‎western, especially attacking its values. These are all backward societies ‎with dictatorial governments sitting on top of volcanoes in varying ‎stages of activity. Whatever their relations with various western nations, ‎they vehemently oppose democracy, freedom of speech, equality of ‎women. As an astute observer has said, these regimes are in a state of ‎truce with their own people, at the expense of others – subjects of ‎Islamic violence and hatred. Bin Laden sums up these “others” as ‎‎“Crusaders and Jews” to be annihilated.‎

‎ * * *

‎ Islamic extremism has its solid roots in Islam itself, both as a creed and ‎as a state. Islam began by extreme violence towards any dissent and ‎opposition, and soon became an empire. It has never shed that imperial-‎colonial ambition. The problem with Moslem societies on the whole is ‎the stark contrast between ambition -- which means believing in a ‎potential – and the reality of their historic failure in almost all aspects of ‎human endeavor. The solution, at least for the revivalists, lies in going ‎back to what was the cause of their excellence, i.e. the pure Islam of ‎Mohammad and his immediate successors. It is the easiest way out of ‎poverty, tyranny, foreign domination, backwardness. It does not entail ‎any change of attitudes and values; only an adherence to the Qor'an and ‎tradition. Generations after generation of Muslims are brought up with ‎such beliefs, tolerated, if not sponsored or even promoted by their ‎corrupt, un-representative ruling classes.‎

Much is being said about the Palestinian problem as being at the heart ‎of the international terrorism, which is another name for Islamic ‎extremism. Without denying that this issue is playing very well into the ‎hands of the revivalists and the vital necessity of reaching a just ‎agreement, there is really no correlation between the two. This ‎phenomenon long preceded the problem in the Middle East and no ‎practical solution would be enough for the extremists. Anvar Sadat was ‎assassinated by the Islamists for regaining all Egyptian territory after ‎reaching an agreement with Israel. Any solution for Palestinian ‎problem short of abolition of Israel would be considered a sell out.‎

The very fact that Middle East is one of the most tense and crisis prone ‎areas of the world is an indication that external elements are secondary ‎to the contradictions of a civilization that has failed despite all human ‎and natural resources. Its intrinsic instability is not confined to itself, as ‎is mostly the case in Africa, but because of the geo-strategic importance ‎of the Middle East, it usually overflows to other areas. So apart from ‎reducing tensions in the area, there must be a more comprehensive ‎approach to the problem of international terrorism--a kind of terrorism ‎emanating from the special circumstances of the Islamic middle east.‎

We see the beginning of such an approach in the West’s forceful ‎response to Al Qaida terrorists and their Taliban supporters. The ‎Islamic revivalists, in their desperate situation need success to survive. ‎Up to September 11 they had got away with hostage taking in Tehran, ‎massacring Americans in Beirut and Khobar, destroying two US ‎embassies in Africa, damaging an American warship in Aden, even ‎bombing one of the world trade center towers. The inevitable sense of ‎invincibility was a big factor in daring to execute the mortal blow of ‎that day. Now every terrorist group and state is confronted with the ‎horrifying prospect of what has been done to the Taliban and bin Laden ‎group. ‎

Islamic revivalism, which intellectually is bankrupt, has fared even ‎worse militarily. It has failed as a government in Iran; and now is ‎failing as a military force in Afghanistan. A whiff of western technology ‎‎– byproducts of a supposedly inferior civilization -- proved more than ‎enough for turning the soldiers of Islam into dust. Given the importance ‎of material power for Muslims everywhere, this military debacle is all ‎the more devastating.‎

‎ * * *

 September 11th and its aftermath proves the following three ‎propositions:‎
‎1st, there is such a thing as international terrorism and it has everything ‎to do with Islamic revivalism or fundamentalism.‎
‎2nd, there is a clash between western and Islamic civilization, in the ‎sense that a good part of the latter not only rejects the civilization of the ‎west, but actively tries to destroy it. Other civilizations even if not trying ‎to catch up with the West or prefer their own values, are not at war ‎with it.‎
‎3erd, it is high time for all and especially Muslim societies themselves to ‎confront the problem in all its aspects and end ignoring or covering it ‎up. Military operations and counter terrorism measures are very ‎important, but the war on terrorism has many other aspects. ‎

The West as a prime target of this brand of terrorism should try to solve ‎the politico-economic problems fueling it. Uprooting terrorist cells and ‎destroying Terrorist organizations should be pursued relentlessly and ‎by any means and for as long that takes. But the political and social ‎cesspool, the breeding ground of this particular terrorism, must be ‎dried up. The Palestinian issue, whatever its relation to the problem, ‎comes first. It is a problem affecting much more than the main ‎protagonists. There is now a good opportunity to bring it to a mutually ‎agreeable end.‎

But as has been shown, there are deeper sociological roots and now the ‎conditions are more favorable for tackling them. After Iran, Algeria ‎and now Afghanistan, it is safe to assume that Islamists’ obsession with ‎material power and violence has been dealt a mortal blow. The ‎fundamentalist regime in Iran will continue for a while in its slide into ‎oblivion; various revivalist groups everywhere will fume in their ‎mounting frustration; and the dream of bringing back the Golden Age ‎will fade in the face of deepening crisis of Islam as a way of organizing ‎human affairs. ‎

What the West could do is to support democratic forces and encourage ‎democratic trends in these societies; putting pressure on despotic rulers ‎and defending human rights. “Real Politic” has had its limits and ‎helped strengthening monstrosities like Saddam Hussein and the ruling ‎Mullahs of Iran. Oil is important but should not be the driving force of ‎foreign policy. The West is not just a driver interested in a gas station. ‎Until Islamic societies enter the world of enlightenment, coming out of ‎their extended dark age, there could not be any guarantee against the ‎wrath of teeming multitudes in their tens of millions, who have no better ‎future than as martyrs.‎

International terrorism cannot operate without secure bases. Iraq, ‎Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and last but not least the Islamic ‎Republic have been or still are providing bases for it; Saudi Arabia ‎being a major financial source--apart from drug money. That sort of ‎support could be stopped by a combination of forceful diplomacy and ‎economic pressure.‎
The direct relationship between dictatorship and terrorism is now so ‎clearly established that there is no need to elaborate here.‎

‎ * * *‎

The main task, however, lies with Muslim societies themselves. They ‎must emancipate themselves from the hold of dictatorial regimes and ‎reactionary religious establishments. Only the people, and the ‎intellectuals at their forefront, could break the vicious circle of political ‎and cultural suppression strengthening each other and further ‎weakening the society. The fight would have no better starting point ‎than attacking the taboos, discussing freely what has been shrouded in ‎sanctity.‎

There is a lot of talk about the secularism in Islamic countries. Here one ‎should beware of clishes. Secularism is not just having a non-religious ‎constitution. Turkey has had such a document for eight decades, and ‎the Islamic taboo is almost as strong as in say, Pakistan, which along ‎Egypt and Saudi Arabia is a hotbed of the worst aspects of Islamic ‎revivalism. Secularism starts with freedom of speech, fought for by ‎thinkers and writers who are prepared to take risks, and supported by ‎people who are fed up with their diet of ‎
irrelevant teaching. Education and media are the two battlegrounds ‎that if not won, keep these societies from joining the world of 21st ‎century. Emancipation of woman holds the key to winning in that ‎battleground. Nothing holds the Islamic impasse as much as feminine ‎subjugation. The Turkish government in its quest for EU membership ‎recently took a giant step and made women, in affairs of family, legally ‎equal to men.‎

There is a strong case for fighting poverty in connection to anti terrorist ‎campaign. However, the fact that many of the masterminds and ‎recruited of Al Qaida come from Saudi Arabia, one of the richest lands, ‎tells another story. Without democracy and human rights no amount of ‎money has created stable political systems and popular content. Islamic ‎terrorism is a direct product of a culture not only unwilling to accept ‎Modernity, but opposing it to the point of -- in the case of an important ‎minority --taking arms against it. Islam in its long encounter with ‎Modernity has responded in many ways, like all traditional societies. ‎But the vehemence and doggedness of the Islamists is unique. Other ‎civilizations try to adjust to, and reach the level of western civilizations. ‎Many Muslims want to barricade against it.‎

Nobody wants to abolish Islam. Whoever wants to be a believer is free ‎to do so. But Islam, like any other phenomenon, cannot escape scrutiny ‎and the working of free thought. It has dominated so many countries for ‎so long, and has to yield to critical assessment. In the end its place in ‎Muslim societies would be more or less like Christianity in the West, ‎notwithstanding fundamental differences. It would continue as a faith – ‎but without any enforcement.‎
‎ ‎
Iran is a trendsetter in this respect. Secularism, even a certain aversion ‎to any religious interference, is flowing from the depths of society. ‎People might or might not be religious, but it is not a defining factor in ‎the choices they make -- including friends and foes. This is the wave of ‎the future in the Islamic world.‎

‎_________________________________________________________‎

‎* Speech made at UC Sacramento, April 02‎