Perhaps no word instills more fear in this post 9/11 world than "jihad." It is provocative and stinging and is at the center of a divided Islam today. What exactly does it mean? Is there consensus on what Muslims believe about jihad? How should we view it as Christians?

First, Osama bin Laden's call for the world's 1.2 billion Muslims to join his "jihad" against America may sound like a clarion call to arms, but for many Muslims it is an illegitimate addition to their faith. While the notion of holy war stretches back to the historic foundations of Islam, the term has been abused in the past several decades. The result is confusion and lack of certainty. The four main historical sources of Islam-- Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey--have long dismissed bin Laden's repeated calls for jihad. As Nuri Ozturk, a leading Islamic progressive scholar who teaches in Turkey has argued, "There are two kinds of Islam. The real Islam is the Koran. Then there is political Islam, a false Islam, being turned into an ideology that exploits Muslims for political ends."

Second, throughout the history of Islam opinions have differed over what exactly constitutes jihad. Muhammad (A.D. 570-632) offered different interpretations of jihad (an Arabic word that means struggle). In the Koran, jihad can be a purely defensive war or justify an unprovoked attack. There is also a reference to jihad as an internal struggle against that which displeases Allah. But according to what scholars believe are Muhammad's most authoritative revelations, jihad theoretically remains a lifelong duty to expand the territory of Islam at the expense of non-Muslims, with whom no peace treaty has religious validity or permanence.

Third, bin Laden spoke of the 11 September hijackers as martyrs for whom jihad had automatically opened the gates of paradise. His Al Qaeda network has drawn a parallel between their struggle and the early jihad of Muhammad for control of the Arabian peninsula before he died. That claim has resonated with the young and the faithful who are taught exclusively the life of Muhammad as the foundation of their education.

Fourth, bin Laden has taken a radical step in incorporating jihad into his terrorism against the United States and the subsequent response by the US with its war on Afghanistan. He is now arguing that these developments have divided the world into "the camp of the faithful and the camp of the infidels." This classic division of the world into a "domain of peace" of the Muslims and the "domain of war" of the infidels is central to his two- world vision. The jihad is therefore at the center of his Islamic radicalism. This is the nature of the world struggle and the US leads the camp of the "infidels" that he must destroy. His jihad thus has cosmic proportions and it is truly a fight to the death.

We are not dealing with the normative Muslim here but with the radicalization of an idea jihad that has had a confusing history but is now radicalized to promote the destruction of America in a cosmic jihad that will decide the destiny of the next few years.

See Wall Street Journal, "Repeated Calls for Jihad Lessen Impact."

Back to top

THE AL QAEDA NETWORK IN ASIA

We are now coming to understand that Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda has spread to Asia in a major way. The networks based in the Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia are among the likely targets for future military action by the United States. The US believes that these East Asian groups have expanded their operations in recent years, exchanging money, personnel, materiel, and experience with the bin Laden organization.

For the US, these groups pose a clear and present danger to American institutions overseas. The Philippines are a major operational hub, where they have exploited the economic and political instability of the nation. In recent years, Al Qaeda has gained adherents to jihad against American institutions and influences. Who are some of these groups?

First is the Abu Sayyaf group battling the Philippine army in the southern island of Basilan, where they have taken two American missionaries hostage. This terrorist group has obtained millions of dollars in ransom from kidnapping tourists, missionaries and resort workers. They have then used this ransom money to buy weapons and speedboats, to pay recruits and bribe Philippine soldiers. Their goal is a separate Islamic nation and they have strong links to bin Laden. The leader of the group, Abdujarak Abubakar Janjalani, is a Filipino Muslim who fought alongside bin Laden in the Afghan war against the Soviets. Al Qaeda provides Islamic schools and charities through which millions of dollars have flowed to support their efforts across South and East Asia.

Second is the Indonesian group called Laskar Jihad that has received money, men and equipment from Al Qaeda and has been reinforced by Taliban guerillas. The other Indonesian group is the Islamic Defense Front, already threatening American officials and organizations.

Finally, bin Laden associates are known to have worked out of Malaysia as well. One of the terrorists of 11 September was involved in a January 2000 terrorism meeting in Malaysia. In short, the bin Laden network is expanding deep into Asia and constitutes a real threat to American interests in that part of the world as well as the governments of Asia.

See New York Times, "Asia Terror Links" (10 October 2001).

Back to top

ONGOING GEOPOLITICAL CHANGES

The effects of the 9/11 terrorist attacks continue to reverberate through the world. Periodically, I will provide an update on these changes.

First, the position of Yasir Arafat is increasingly precarious. Arafat has embraced a two- state solution in his struggle with Israel the creation of a Palestinian state alongside of Israel. However, the other radical Palestinian group Hamas along with Osama bin Laden, demand a two stage solution first drive the Jews out of Israel and then out of Middle East. Arafat needs the United States to complete his dream. Hamas regards the US as a threat to Islam.

There is therefore a new dimension to the Palestinian struggle. The US will never allow Israel to be destroyed. So, the goal of Hamas is unreachable. Add to this the reality of the growing revulsion to terrorism after 9/11 and the deep need that Arafat has for US help to realize his goals. Hamas is clearly challenging him and his Palestinian Authority, which governs the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

The major question is whether Arafat's grip on power is slipping. Israel demands that Arafat arrest Hamas leaders, who recently assassinated an Israeli cabinet member. Should Arafat do so, he will be branded as a tool of Israel and the US. Watch what he does over the next few weeks. His position is extremely precarious and shaky. Israel demands he act, as does the US; but he cannot further alienate his followers, who find bin Laden attractive.

Second, Russia is shifting demonstrably towards the United States. President Putin has placed himself squarely in the same camp as the West after 9/11. Further, Putin has accepted American military presence in the former Soviet republics in Central Asia of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, a bold and strategic break with the past. In exchange, the US has implicitly endorsed Russia's claim that the war in Chechnya is likewise a battle against Islamic terrorists. The major question is whether this realignment of Russia and the West will last for the long haul. Russia has constantly vacillated between the East and the West; right now its eggs are in the West's basket. Putin sees this as the key to having Russia accepted as a full member of the West and of Europe.

(See Wall Street Journal [11 October 2001], p. A17.)

Third, the enlargement of the European Union is likely to slow right now. The 9/11 attacks have caused the topics of internal security, including Europe-wide policing, border controls and agreements for extradition between member countries, to become central issues in Europe right now. Finally, of late Europe has been pursuing the idea that Europe's foreign policy should be very different than the United States. Right now, that is not occurring. Tony Blair of England has made it clear that they stand with the US. Even France has affirmed the same. Right now the foreign policy of Europe is tied even more firmly to the United States. (

See New York Times [12 October 2001], Op Ed article by Timothy Garton Ash.)

Finally, China had been fostering the idea that it was the key nation forging a new bloc of nations against militant Islam. It has seen itself as the major Asian alternative to the diplomatic and economic power of the United States. As the leader of a global coalition against terrorism, the US now monopolizes the agenda against militant Islam that China had earlier embraced as its goal. Pakistan, Russia, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan, all former allies in this Chinese coalition, are now solidly behind the US. Further, America's own anti-terrorism agenda overshadowed the economic and trade issues that were meant to be the focus of the gathering in Shanghai of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. That China hosted the APEC meeting was to be a crowning achievement of its focus, but China was in the US shadow the entire week. China, which has long criticized the monopolar world dominated by the US, now sees its criticism of the US mooted by 9/11. China, too, is changed by the terrorist strike of 9/11.

(See Wall Street Journal [19 October 2001].)

Back to top