What’s the real cause of war?Are Muslims terrorists? [Archives:2003/688/Opinion]

November 24 2003

Barkatullah Marwat
[email protected]

As to the current scenario, there is a question begging an answer: How was the former USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republic) disintegrated? I feel even the great historians as well as political analysts are still unable to find out any valid answer to the question. But one thing is crystal clear. During the Cold War, had the Muslims not supported US so generously, the situations might be different today.
Surprisingly and ironically, soon after the disintegration of the USSR, the real face of US appeared from behind her friendly mask, from which the Muslims were simply ignorant and oblivious. The Afghan Muhajireen along with their homeland (Afghanistan) were left short on their mercy. Likewise, the US also turned a blind eye to Pakistan, imposing sanctions on it for developing nuclear weapons. And finally, it decided to set eyes on the oil-rich resources of the Middle East.
Samuel P. Huntington's ideology in his book 'Clash of Civilizations' is not only appreciated, but needs to be taken seriously in the world, specifically in Western countries. Why? Because according to them, countries which border any Muslim state could not be safe. Therefore, it was imperative that the bloodcurdling attitude of the Muslims should have to be overpowered at all costs, otherwise they (Muslims) would succeed in implementing their idea across the globe.
In fact, those who were the precious diamonds of the US crown, and acted as front liners during the era of Cold War, were later painted as extremists, fundamentalists and terrorists. Thus a fiercer and more forceful war against them has been launched.
Soon after the end of the Cold War, admittedly, one sad incident took place. That was the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Nobody knew, except the US, at whose request Saddam Hussain did that.
Thereafter, what happened is clear to everyone, that the US and her media launched a vast campaign against Saddam, posing him as a threat to the regional as well as global peace. But secretly, she was planning how to take this region's resources.
History speaks for itself: a coalition of 32 allied forces came into being which was led by the US.
It was quite ridiculous to see Iraqi forces, that had ended its almost 10-year long war with Iran, were not only deadly exhausted and tired but also needed to take a rest as well as mending the dents of their devastated economy. Anyway, the US-led forces succeeded in expelling the Iraqi troops from Kuwait, but amazingly, the US did not walk out of the region even when the dust of the Desert Storm settled down.
It merits a mention here that the author of 'Crisis of Islam', Bernar Dlevus, admitting the dual policy of US, clearly pinpointed that when Saddam Hussain was ousted from Kuwait, the US signaled the Iraqi Kurds and Shias to stand up against Saddam, assuring them of full support. Saddam crushed their uprising mercilessly by killing thousands of them, but they miserably failed to see the US shipment. What a shame! I feel the dead are still cursing and yelling at the US for their unpardonable betrayal.
The First Gulf War (1990-91) left a deep impact on one group, which was a close ally to the US, even during the Cold War. It realized it was betrayed and started nursing grudges against US. And most of the US departments had already known the said group while Muslims were still totally ignorant of that.
They thought that they had been deceived because during the Cold War, it was the version of the US that 'fight against the enemies of God' (Russians), but she herself came to the region (Middle Easat) under the pretext of liberating Kuwait from Iraqi occupation.
Thus, this group formally decided to encounter US. Who was the group leader? Surely, it was Osama bin Laden and his members, who fought in Afghanistan side by side with Afghan Mujahideen and Pakistan troops against the USSR occupation. It's worth mentioning here that before the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, not one of the adjacent countries did not know that 'Al-Qaeda' is the name of Osama bin Laden's group/organization.
Well, Osama bin Laden came to limelight when in 1998 some attacks were made on US Embassies in Africa. The US, taking revenge of the attacks, shelled a few missiles on Afghanistan, claiming hundreds of innocent people. Why do I mentioned all this here? Because the harmless Muslim, specially the general public, never ever did anything wrong, except taking out the protest demonstrations in their own countries, damaging the public and private estates. And those who turned out to be the US's arch rivals, are actually those Mujahideen who fully supported the US during the Cold War.
During the Afghanistan war which began in October, 2001, the American policies in terms of guarding democracy gained its ends partially. An official signal to strike Afghanistan was granted by the UN.
Almost all the countries were threatened to stand by the US, or become enemies in the war. Evidently, no one was ready to take the wrath of US. And finally, the Taliban rule came to an end.
But, in the case of Second Gulf War, when she realized that her old tactics didn't work out any more, the US claimed that Saddam possessed WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction). The UN questioned her justification. Even someone was heard asking, “If Saddam really possessed WMD, then why were these left with him 12 years ago?
Despite having no rational reasons to the questions raised on the occasions, the US had cleverly set all the International Laws, UN charters, and state sovereignty (of Iraq) back, and instantly attacked the country.
Of course, this time the situations were totally different from what had happened during the First Gulf War. Most of the countries strongly protested the attack, terming it as an open aggression. According to a rough estimate, some 600 cities of the world, protests and demonstrations were witnessed, shouting 'Blood for Oil' was unacceptable.
Since 1990, many ups and downs have been witnessed. The situations are totally changed. But even then some of the US scholars and experts appear to be reluctant to establish critically and objectively any solid point of view in terms of the current affairs.
And sometimes the writer of 'Crisis of Islam', Bernal Delivas, appears to have failed to weigh the circumstances. On one place he writes, “Muslims usually tend to object to the term 'Islamic terrorism' because terrorism is itself a word. It is not attributed to any religion.” The learned writer answers with simplicity, saying that since the current terrorism has stemmed from Islamic culture, therefore, it is called 'Islamic terrorism'. I don't think so, but if so, then only in its face value.
Well, the author is, no doubt, a renowned scholar, and I believe he makes good judgments of the situation. But if he agrees to what he wrote, then I am sure he would also know that it were the very Western culture and Western democracy that bore Nazism. Similarly, Hitler got elected with landslide majority; so can it be named as western or Christian Nazism?
If so, then I think there is no harm in calling it 'Democratic Nazism”. Even it could be asked, “When the US fired nuclear bombs on Japan during the World War II, were those bombs democratic or Christian? Recently, Iraq and Afghanistan also experienced deadly hits from the US. Does anyone raise a question if these weapons can be termed as US democratic weapons? If not, then terrorism is supposed not to be linked and related to any religion.
Accordingly, let me sum up by quoting an adage, “Live and let live.” If the US wants peace and development across the world, then she will have to pursue that saying. There is no room for terrorism in any religion. All of us whether Muslim, Christian, Jews, Hindu, or Sikh believe in oneness of Allah/God/Lord/Baghwan/Rab respectively.
Then why this bloodshed? Cannot we live peacefully? How long will we there btaunting, terrorizing, blackmailing, victimizing, attacking and blood-shedding over each other? Isn't there any other language except bombs and weapons?
If Osama is a terrorist, then I think everyone is a terrorist. Because you cannot welcome a thief to clean your home of its belongings, can you? You will surely resist and fight off even you have to put your life at stake.