 |
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 2008, pages 67-68 Muslim-American Activism Who Speaks For Islam?
THE MIDDLE EAST Institute presented another in its series of book launches by introducing the new book Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think (available from the AET Book Club) on March 20 at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, DC. Author and executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies Dalia Mogahed, who co-wrote the book with Georgetown University Professor John Esposito, said she felt that it was important to share their findings on the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, due to the fact that their polling showed that the majority of the Muslim world thought the attack did more harm than good. In addition, she said, their polling found that the war didn’t help American-Muslim relations in the U.S. In March 2002, 54 percent of Americans who were asked what they know about Islam or Muslims answered “not much or nothing at all.“ In January of 2007, when the same question was asked of Americans, the answer “not much or nothing” was given by 57 percent of those polled. “There is a huge gulf,” Mogahed said. “On the one hand there is intense engagement [with the Muslim world], and on the other Americans just don’t know.” Who speaks for the Muslims? Is it the vocal extremists or the authoritive experts? “Gallup decided to ask a billion Muslims what they thought,” Mogahed explained. “Gallup let the data speak for the Muslims.” Gallup also asked other questions in the process, such as what motivates terrorism, can democracy work in the Muslim world, and what do Muslim women want? In the end the data drove the discourse, with all the findings presented in the book. “We had a sampling representing a billion people,” Mogahed said. “We thought a billion was a good round number to take a stab at writing the book.” The first challenge for Gallup was how to poll a billion Muslims. The survey targeted Muslims in the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, Asia, Central Asia and sub-Sahara Africa, obtaining samples of ten of thousands Muslims. Two of the key questions asked by the Gallup poll were what makes a radical, and what drives extremism? According to many political pundits in this country, Islamic religious fanatism creates extremism. If this is true, Mogahed said, we as Americans have a great deal to worry about, because their findings showed that religion plays an important role in the lives of most Muslims. In Iran, for example, 74 percent of the population feel religion is an important part of their lives. But by the same token, 64 percent of Americans agreed religion was central in their lives. “Widespread religiosity does not spread to terrorism,” Mogahed stated. When Muslims around the world were asked if 9/11 was completely justified and if they had an unfavorable view of the U.S., 7 percent of those polled said yes. In the book, these individuals are referred to (for lack of a better term) as the politically radicalized—or simply the 7 percent. Those opposed to 9/11 cited loss of human life and religious justification against such an act, many quoting the Qur’an. Interestingly, the 7 percent did not quote any religious verse to justify their opinion, but instead cited counter-hegemony arguments. “They felt this is what America deserved not due to theology, but geopolitics,” Mogahed pointed out. Another surprising discovery was that the 7 percent on average were educated and affluent. In his 2002 State of the Union address, U.S. President George W. Bush argued that “They hate our freedoms.” Gallup asked the so-called “they” what they find most appealing about the West. Number one was the West’s technology, second the West’s form of liberty and democracy. The same question was asked of Americans, the majority of whom cited the West’s liberties and democracy, and then technology. The majority of Muslims polls went on to say that in their preferred vision of their country, they would choose freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly. Again there was no difference between the opinions of the 7 percent and the majority of Muslims. In fact, the 7 percent felt a move to democracy would help Muslims in their progress forward. When Muslims were asked how the West should solve problems with the Muslim world, the answer was loud and clear: show greater respect for Muslims and do not look down on Muslims. “Besides feeling humiliated, they have a heightened sense of being threatened,” Mogahed noted. “Their greatest fear was a lack of security.” Those who condemned terrorism are worried about their own personal safety, she added, while those who condone it have a heightened sense of being threatened and controlled and a greater desire for self-determination. Gallup found that Muslims view the world through a prism of pain, with three major contributing factors: cultural disrespect, political domination and the three current conflicts in the region, Israel/Palestine, Iraq and, to a degree, Afghanistan. “Each reinforces one another,” Mogahed said. “Abu Gharib is an example.” In all the countries surveyed, the majority of Muslims condemned attacks on civilian targets. The numbers of those who viewed attacks against civilians as justified or not were about the same in Muslim countries as compared to the U.S. Being religious is not unique to the Muslim world: Gallup found that religion played just as an important role in Africa and Latin America. While the majority of Muslims polled felt that shariah law should be a source in determining legislation, the majority in the Muslim world did not think that religious leaders should play a role in governing the land; those who did thought they should have a role as advisers only. Interestingly, the majority of Americans who were asked if the Bible should be a source in determining their laws answered yes, with 9 percent of them believing that it should be the only source. In the question-and-answer segment, Mogahed was asked why “we” haven’t heard Arabs and Muslims speaking out against terrorism. She replied that we have heard from the Arab and Muslim world over and over again: “I could give you pages upon pages, reams upon reams of links to condemnations to 9/11,” Mogahed said. “Every prominent Muslim organization and leaders around the world have condemned 9/11, but they are not being covered by our major media outlets.” She went a step further by saying that a definition must be created to explain what condemnation means, who should condemn what. All of this should be done in a way that truly isolates the terrorists rather than alienating all Muslims. “How much should we be asking Muslims to condemn when we are saying they have nothing to do with the situation?” she asked. “By asking Muslims everywhere to constantly condemn what the terrorists are doing, we are in fact giving them an in-group membership.” In her opinion, this is guilt by association. She used the analogy of asking all American Christians to condemn every action of the Ku Klux Khan, an American Christian-based terrorist group. Another listener asked why it was that other “communities” such as Jews have felt persecuted and powerless throughout history, but were not willing to kill themselves to reach their goals. “Why does it seem to be a Muslim phenomenon?” Strongly disagreeing with this assessment, Mogahed cited Robert A. Pape’s book Dying to Win (available from the AET Bookclub). According to Pape’s findings the majority of groups that have participated in suicide bombing were secular. The Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka were the first in modern times to resort to suicide bombing. Mogahed cited her own findings that, when asked whether they believe in the moral justification of sacrificing one’s life for a noble cause, 51 percent of Americans said yes. —Jamal Najjab |
|||||
