Islam

Published by The National Herald, February 4, 2005

Third Wave of Militant Islam: A Political Proposal

By Dr. Christos Evangeliou
Special to The National Herald

At present, we face a pressing problem created by revived religious fanaticism in Islamic countries and concomitant terrorism. This culminated in the atrocities of the 9/11, which led to the declaration of war on terrorism by the United States.

But behind these recent terrorist acts, there is a long history of fanatic religious intolerance generated by the spreading of monotheistic, proselytizing and ecumenical faiths, like messianic Christianity and the militant Islam.

These faiths may appear to enlightened persons as dangerous deviations from both tolerant Hellenic Polytheism and pious Judaism, but the entire civilized world is entangled in their deadly snares of religious fanaticism.

A close look at the world history of the last 2,000 years clearly shows that peace can not exist between the followers of these monotheistic and fanatical faiths, who are by all means necessary prepared to fight each other and the followers of other religions to the bitter end.

For example, when Christians acquired political power in the Fourth Century AD, they turned their hatred and furry against civilized and tolerant ancient polytheism. They destroyed the beauty of artworks and civil institutions, which had been created by Hellenic genius and secured by Roman imperial might for many centuries. The Olympic Games were abolished, and the philosophical schools in Athens were forcibly shut down. As soon as these Orthodox Christians finished with the Polytheists, they turned their intolerant zeal against their fellow Christians of a slightly different doctrine which opposed the Orthodox. The Heretics were mercilessly eliminated, just like the pagans. With the rise of militant and conquering Islam in the Seventh Century, messianic Christian fanaticism met its match and was paid back in like terms, with added interest in terms of terrorism.
Three waves of militant Islam against Christianity (originally Orthodox and Catholic, but eventually Protestant and Evangelical also) can be discerned in world history.

In the first wave of militant Islam (7th-8th Centuries), the Byzantine Christian Empire, lost Alexandria and Antioch, among other great centers of Hellenic and Christian culture in the Middle East and North Africa, while the faithful armies of Islam reached Spain in the West and India in the East.

In the second wave of marching Islam (15th-16th Centuries), Constantinople, the seat of the Byzantine Empire itself, was conquered, while the fanatic followers of Mohammed reached Vienna in Central Europe and threatened the Holy Seat of Rome.

The third wave of aggressively militant Islam is stirring up in our time (end of 20th and beginning of 21st Centuries). If the winds of history are favorable to it, Europe may be caught napping again, as it was twice before. Islamic forces may now be able to conquer Rome, Vienna, Paris and the rest of Europe from within by infiltration and reproduction.

This third wave of militant Islam, which was stirred up at the end of the 20th Century, is now in full sway due to several historical reasons. I shall mention only two.

The first and most important of these reasons was the end of the Cold War, with the collapse of the Communist experiment in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe. The atheist ideology of Marxism-Leninism, and the officially declared atheism of the then powerful Soviet state, had an unintended effect: to bring the traditionally hostile, constantly competing for world dominion, monotheistic and intolerant faiths of Christianity and Islam closer together. These two fanatical faiths, and sister religions of Hebraic roots, had been fighting each other in one fashion and front or another for many centuries (from the Seventh to the 20th Centuries). Facing the common menace of Communist atheism, Christianity in all of its forms, but especially in its evangelizing form, and the revived purist form of Islam "miraculously" joined forces and successfully fought the Communists, especially in Afghanistan.

The second important factor which contributed significantly to the rise of the third wave of aggressive and militant Islam was the ultimate defeat of the invading Soviet forces in Afghanistan. From this fertile ground of fanatical Islamic forces at war, a few years later sprang Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda terrorist organization.

On 9/11, the hatred and horror of Islamic fanaticism reached the heart of the world?s surviving superpower: The United States of America.

The U.S. was "at war" and ready to fight back with force. Within moths, American military might dislodged the Taliban regime from its seat of power in Afghanistan, and disrupted the operational base of Al Qaeda. But Osama Bin Laden escaped capture and is still at-large, hiding and threatening revenge, while the U.S. prepared to go to war again to disarm Saddam Hussein, in case the United Nations failed to do so. The entire Arab and Muslim world is now once again stirred up, just like Bin Laden wished. Hence, there is need of political sagacity, foresight and practical wisdom.

At this critical moment in history, American Foreign policy should be extra cautious and dexterous to avoid the following dangerous pitfalls:

First, it would be a grave mistake if the war against Iraq produces a situation similar to that unfolding in Palestine. It would be tragic if the U.S., leader of the Free World, ends up policing Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East. It would be disgraceful if the U.S. Government imitates the Israeli Government, trying desperately to hold down the rebellious Palestinians in the West Bank, who are ready to blow themselves up in the name of freedom and God. The world?s lone superpower must have much higher and nobler goals than this. It would be sad if it were true, as some think, that U.S. policy on Palestine is influenced by conservative Christians and based on "Biblical prophecy" to the effect that, in order for the Apocalypse to occur, "Israel must exist to be destroyed."

Second, it would be equally unwise if U.S. policymakers were to try and imitate the long-dead Turkish Empire in an attempt to bring Muslims, Christians and Jews together in Palestine and the wider Middle East, forcing them somehow to live together peacefully. This would probably not work in the long run because it would not be acceptable to the Arab Muslims for three reasons:

1. Muslims believe that, as "true believers," they are "the chosen people of God (Allah)," and thus have a privileged position among the infidels, similar to Mohammed?s place of honor among all Biblical prophets.

2. Their historical experience as rulers over Christians and Jews for centuries compels them to believe that Muslims have the right to systematically mistreat their Christian and Jewish slaves like dirt or, at best, as second-class citizens.

3. The Arab Muslim perception is that, at the present time, missionary Christians and Zionist Jews are conspiring against the "true believers," their "perfect faith," and their oil-rich sands. In their eyes, Western, Protestant, Evangelical and Apocalyptic Christians are not unlike the Orthodox and Catholic Christians of the past, who were either eliminated from their conquered lands completely and mercilessly, or "sufficiently domesticated" through centuries of slavery.

Third, it may appear to some policymakers as a good idea, and perhaps a better alternative to the above, to let different Muslim sects (e.g., Sunni and Shi?ia) fight and exterminate each other in the name of Allah. In this way, it would become evident at the end that the "true believers" are "truly favored" by Allah above all others.

But this is nothing new. In fact, a similar phenomenon occurred in the 1980?s during the Iran-Iraq war. Thousands of "true believers" were killed, but the war ended in a stalemate.

Moreover, Prophet Mohammed, in his political shrewdness, has provided the necessary means to his followers for a quick and easy replenishment of the ranks of "holy warriors" by encouraging polygamy and high birth rates. So, by the end of the 20th Century, decadent, aging and sterile Europe will be surrounded by an overwhelming, populous, and militant Islamic wave ready to take over.

Consequently, none of the above alternatives would be an honorable and long-lasting solution to the Iraqi problem, the Middle East, Muslims, the U.S., the U.N., or the world at-large.

Therefore, this is the critical time for the American Democracy to test the true power of Democracy and freedom, the ideal weapons guided by rational philosophic thinking, rather than by fanatical faith. One is bound to wonder about what would happen if the U.S., in cooperation with the U.N., were to declare honestly that all Middle Eastern and other countries, which share the Arabic language and Islamic faith, are invited to form a "Union of Democratic Arab States." This Arabic union could be patterned on the European Union model. Of course, any "UDAS" would have to come to terms with the State of Israel, which they should recognize, with boarders to be determined equitably by the U.N.

It could promise that, if the united Arabic democracies behave democratically, engaging more in the studies of philosophy and science and less in religious studies, they could even be considered a candidate for a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council. For this honor, they would have to compete with other potential candidates (e.g., India, Japan and possibly a "Union of Latin American Democracies").

In this ideal situation of a humane and harmonious world of the future, there would not be any good reason for the E.U. to have two permanent seats in the Security Council. By offering one of the seats to one of the proposed unions of Latin or Arab democratic states, it might miraculously appeal to the dignity and pride of these groups of peoples with distinguished historical traditions.

As Socrates would say, this may be a dream, but it is a noble dream, worthy of serious political consideration and deep thought.

Dr. Evangeliou is Professor of Hellenic Philosophy at Towson University in Baltimore, Maryland and author of several books, including "Hellenic Philosophy: Between Europe, Asia and Africa."



Volume 7 Number 6 - Tuesday, February 8th, 2005	A Publication of the ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN LAITY