Aftab Ahmad Malik (Ed.). The Empire and the Crescent: Global Implications for a New American Century; Amal Press, Bristol England, 2003. 210p.
This book is a collection of essays in the spirit of post 9-11 literature analyzing in two sections, (a) the Bush administration’s “War on Terror” and (b) contemporary issues facing Muslims in the wake of the 9-11 attack and its effect on the Muslim identity. The first section, I found informative but dark – while the second, extremely thought provoking. In fact, I was loaned a copy of this book that at present is not available at either the websites of Amazon or Barnes and Nobles. It is available through some of the Muslim vendors – but should be marketed better.
I do not have a strong appetite for conspiracy theories or legitimate outrages against the corruption in politics. It is likely that those who do relish such topics will pour through what I patiently force-fed myself in the first part of this book. I did appreciate the way the first 9 chapters confirmed some of the disgusting war profiteering of the Bush-Cheney administration that I was initially exposed to through watching Fahrenheit 9-11 (which must be acknowledged first as entertaining propaganda before given any credence). Both the film and the book caused me to puzzle over what type of demonic monsters would actually position themselves to profit from the destruction and senseless bloodshed that comes of modern war.
What I did find intriguing in this section was with regard to the provocative term “Empire” and the notion (though not stated in these terms) that Manifest Destiny did not die when America stretched herself from “Sea to Shining Sea”, but is alive and well in the global age, stretching herself around the world and maintaining its dominant position as the only remaining superpower. What differs from Manifest Destiny though, is that at least within what became America’s domestic borders is a certain degree of prosperity – while in this new age of empire building, America seeks only to control the resources that will sustain its supremacy, limiting the American ideals of freedom and liberty to be used only as rhetoric that legitimizes our dominance.
For those who are not that familiar with the facts about oil wealth and the maneuverings of the Bush-Cheney administration, I myself, was able to keep up. One new idea that did cross my mind before on this subject was the question of why not? If oil is actually so valuable today and becoming scarcer by the hour, then why should the world’s biggest oil consumer allow other countries to control this precious commodity? I am not talking about Iraq, but rather, the other nations that would be poised to overrun Iraq for the oil prize – a prize that could be used strategically against the US, given its oil dependence. In other words, if the US took a moral high ground and left Iraq to profit from its own wares, what is to stop some other giant from rolling in and running the show?
This brings us to the efficacy of today’s Muslims in self-determination. In this regard, the book does not make a smooth transition. In fact, I continue to question why the second half isn’t available separately – or better yet, why the second half could not have been the whole, supplied with more similarly thought provoking material on the modern Muslim predicament. I vigorously read this section with increasing interest.
Hamza Yusuf begins with a short discussion of anger and why the Muslim world is angry. This was merely a warm-up. Esposito critically considers the so-called “clash of civilizations” that characterizes the paradigm of Islam and the West. [Meanwhile I haphazardly came across and attended part of a conference held by Muslim scholars like Sherman Jackson and Muneer Fareed discussing Huntingtons latest book Who Are We?, addressed to Americans in the face of the "Clash". The "clash" theory was proposed by Huntington over 10 years ago as a new paradigm in the wake of the cold wars passing.]
Zaid Shakir offers a textual analysis of Jihad to counter the claims of antagonists that Islam requires a state of perpetual war. This essay provides more than your typical “The greater Jihad is the struggle against the self” approach of so many apologists. Rather it seeks to demonstrate that the moderate understanding of Jihad is rooted in classical Islamic thought and is not merely post 9-11 backpedaling.
The most worthwhile essay to me is Abdal Hakim Murad’s discussion on Muslims in America. Murad does an excellent job of examining the historical legacy of nativism in the US and postulates the present relevance of nativism to Muslims in America. Instead of the typical citation of such injustices to demonstrate America’s inherent evils, he argues from the exact opposite end of the spectrum. American nativism will require Muslims to abandon their anti-American culture stance and start discussing how Islam will manifest in the American context. He goes on to point out how this will require a de-ideologization of Islam, offering that the “Movement Islam” of Maududi and Qutb is out of place (and time) in the US and that now more than ever, Muslims need to come to terms with their own legacy of spiritual and cultural expression. American Muslims will also need to undertake a serious study of America and what is right with America, abandoning the stylish demonization of America and Americans that have characterized our Friday speeches up to the present. He offers us a model of humility and respect in the Sahabi emigrants to Abyssinia whose respect, morality, and diplomacy with the Abyssinians saved them from deportation back to the persecution of the Quraish. I think this article brought many critical points to the future of Islam and Muslims in America. It ranks with Dr. Umar Farouk Abd-Allah’s "Islam and the Cultural Imperative" (available for download at www.nawawi.org) and should be read by every American Muslim activist, including Muslim educators seeking to develop a new generation of Muslims in America with an “Islamic” identity.
The last two offerings were also insightful:
Metcalf’s discussion on the Deobandis helped to put many of the subcontinent’s contemporary movements in perspective. Specifically she addressed the Deobandis as well as the Tabligh Jamaat. The treatment of the Deobandi school is pertinent because of their relationship to the Taliban in Afghanistan. Better understanding of such specific schools help differentiate between all Muslims (the way Muslims are portrayed in the press) and the influence of ideological groups on various sectors of Muslim society. The exotic but dark and dreary looking madrassahs depicted by news channels after 9-11 seemed to surpass our worst notions of Christian fundamentalist camps (Waco?). The Taliban, Deoband madrassahs, and the Bin Laden and Zuwaihari’s al-Qaida were all lumped together by the media, thereby reinforcing the stereotype that any outward expression or member of an Islamic movement must have been a terrorist. John Walker Lindh comes to mind as a victim of such irresponsible reporting. Perhaps this helps to bring to the fore the issue regarding how a capitalistic media has surpassed the influence of university scholars in offering knowledge and insight into contemporary affairs – but that is another subject. Yet if we can imagine the likes of Metcalf helping to set the record straight before ransacking a poverty stricken war torn nation in order to find one man, how different might public sentiment have been?
I think more treatment of these contemporary movements and their potential for non-violent influence should be explored. Aside from the conspiracy theories about the Tabligh Jamaat being agents of the British, I have often marveled at the power of the network they have established to call Muslims back to Islam and back to the mosques. Actually it resembles network marketing in many ways. Instead of offering a product, they offer a means of getting away from the attachments of daily life while providing a mission to bring others back to the path of God. They provide a curriculum emphasizing Islamic morals and manners while building the skills required to speak to people, privately and publicly, in order to call them to God’s way. There are criticisms leveled against them too, such as their attitude toward women and the families they leave behind for 40-day stretches. I myself have questioned their efficacy and wondered why they havent adapted themselves to calling non-Muslims rather than limiting themselves to Muslims. Because they are usually dependent on the assistance of the locals to find people to visit, they end up reciting their call to people who are already known and who already frequent the mosque. And recalling their parallels to network marketing, they tend to appear self-serving and annoying to those who have resisted their call to join them. Nonetheless, I think their model has merit and has certainly exerted a positive and peaceful influence on Muslim countries where political oppression has distracted many from their spiritual needs. Perhaps an adaptation of this model to new needs and interests of Muslims is in order.
Kamali’s final chapter discusses Islamic extremism, which I was surprised to enjoy since he quoted almost exclusively from al-Qaradawi throughout. But there were many important points to consider from this essay. One problem I find with terms like extremism and moderation are their inherent relativism. Salafis today are commonly put down as “Wahhabi extremists” but during the late 90s when I strongly identified with this group, I did not consider myself an extremist. In fact, I thought people calling for “moderation” were twisting the words of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to justify their modern/western leanings. In my understanding, moderation was to be defined in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah. I think the less than clear notion that moderation may indeed be tempered by social norms prevalent in a time and place [in addition to standards set by the Quran and Sunnah] remains an uncomfortable topic for Muslims whose culture is on the defensive (due to either residing as a minority in a non-Muslim land, or because of the effects of western imperialism in Muslim lands). Now that the presence of the west has left its mark everywhere, (and continues to do so), we probably need to factor in the influence of the west when deciding what is moderate and what is not. This is certainly the case for Muslims living in the west who are adapting a new cultural mode of Islamic expression. I think the issue will be important to the future of the larger Muslim ummah, because it is required to define our center. There will always be a left and a right, but the concept of the middle in Islam cannot be defined purely by what the majority thinks, as the Quran and the Sunnah must maintain their proper place in setting Islamic norms. In any case, this essay provides healthy grounds for more discussion on this issue.
In closing I think each chapter from the second part of this book offers substance for Muslim thinkers who are engaged in unraveling our questions of Islamic identity in the present age. The first part is also worth reading, if not to simply be able to identify the current agents of imperialism at work in our nations capital. On the whole it is a thought provoking book well worth reading.
Last update : 23-02-2005 12:49
|
|
|
Submission Guidelines 
(0 vote)
