In Tamim Ansary’s excellent history, Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes- written in plain, digestable English, not scholar-speak- a particular passage recently struck me as a lost morsel of critical perspective as we wage our “global war against extremism”. In his book, Ansary is talking about the 7th century battle of Uhud, in which the Prophet Muhammad and his followers are defeated by a Meccan army when they momentarily break ranks in their lust for booty and are led into a trap that kills scores and wounds Muhammad himself. The lesson learned and the cycle of thought established, early on in Muhammad’s struggle, was that:
“Divine support was not an entitlement; Muslims had to earn the favor of Allah by behaving as commanded and submitting to His will. This explanation for defeat provided a stencil that Muslims invoked repeatedly in later years, after the Mongol holocaust of the thirteenth century, for example, when nomadic invaders from Central Asia overwhelmed most of the Islamic world, and again in response to Western domination, which began in the eighteenth century and continues to this day.”
Are Muslims still overtly stressing today about Mongol hordes and 7th century battles? Probably not. It was a long time ago. But this history on some level is an integral part of the Muslim consciousness in the same way that Bible stories form an important part of the Christian psyche in America. They shape attitudes and actions.
This is the problem with civilizations that were once great. When they inevitably decline, their inheritors often draw the wrong conclusions as to what the problem is and how to fix it. Since the Islamic world was once so dominant in every way- dwarfing Europe in science, medicine, tolerance, wealth, military technology- for much of its early history, it is a difficult exercise for Muslims today to admit that the tables have turned and address the root causes dispassionately. Inevitably, emotions and pride kick in and many fall back on the divine favor exemplified by the Uhud parable, with the West playing the role not of enabling partner but of scourge sent to punish the faithful. This feeds a pattern of denial that doesn’t solve the problem, but only exacerbates it.
In the Western world, and in particular in the United States, there is another kind of denial playing out. Reams of position papers, daily briefs, books, op-eds, consultations and conferences have been devoted to fine tuning and teasing out our objectives in this “global campaign”. $2 trillion and counting has been spent invading, demolishing, rebuilding, and reforming Muslim lands. Careers and indeed fortunes (largely Western) have been made around buzz words like nation building, local accountability, institutional transparency, conflict resolution, female empowerment. Freedom and liberty for all. All worthy goals. They mean nothing if a large swath of Muslims continue to see the “West” as playing the immutable role of outsider/barbarian in the defining pattern of their world view.
At the end of the day, reform must be embraced and carried out by Muslims living in Muslim lands, not Westerners twisting arms, cajoling action from faraway capitals. But the recurring framework that emerges in country after country that the American military/development aid machine targets is the same: local strongmen inevitably begin to siphon American tax payer dollars into their own patronage networks, short-circuiting real reform and creating only further resentment among ordinary Muslims that the policy is meant to win over. These local strongmen have no incentive to fight the extremism and poverty that fuels terrorism. On the contrary, they seek to inflame or exaggerate its footprint, if only to ensure the American subsidy that sustains their grip on power is continued or increased. Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan- the story is the same. Yemen, according to the excellent research and journalism of Ellen Knickmeyer- is only the latest shakedown. We reel with surprise when leaders named Karzai, Maliki, Zardari, Saleh, and Mubarak continue to disappoint and limit the potential of their own peoples. Are they the exception or the rule? Are they truly the singular road block to real reform or symptomatic of local systems corrupted to the core and decaying over centuries? Would any other local partner behave differently in countries where institutions are battered and rule of law ephemeral?
Our local bedfellows and their excesses only reinforce the narrative of Uhud in the Muslim mind: the West, the United States in particular, are the new Mongols, more interested in bridgeheads and puppets to safeguard their interests and keep the Muslim world subservient. This dovetails into the extremist narrative that renewal can only come from a return to a pristine form of Islam practiced in the time of the prophet.
Perhaps there is a better way. Perhaps we should stop throwing money at the problem and step back. Perhaps it’s important for Muslims to be accountable to Muslims for a change, and to prove to their citizens and the world that they are worthy of assistance before assistance is given. Interaction, exchange and dialogue between civilizations is one thing- that will never stop and indeed will only accelerate as technology further breaks down barriers of geography. But the billions in assistance that we continue to give to dictators and unelected ruffians near and far? Is that really geared towards helping Muslim civilization emerge from the shadows or is it rather to purchase our own safety and stability in the short-term?
