| |
Ethos Perspectives
Islamism
The paper by Wiktorowicz and Kaltner (Reference
3) highlights the schisms within the Salafi movement, which
have even generated disagreements over who can rightly be
considered a Salafi. Much of that disagreement revolves around
who among the salafi scholars has the right to interpret the
holy texts. The paper notes that the jihadi scholars who provide
religious cover for Al Qaeda and its fellow travellers are
usually self-taught and suffer from a "reputation deficit"
in the eyes of other salafi scholars.
Both the Wiktorowicz and Kaltner paper and
the ICG report discuss one key dispute in salafi circles revolving
around the notion of takfir, i.e., declaring a Muslim an apostate.
Jihadis of what is known as the Qutbist variety, i.e., those
influenced by the radical thought of Egypt’s Sayyid
Qutb, tend to denounce as infidels Muslim rulers who are considered
unjust, dictatorial or corrupt in order to justify jihad against
them. The ICG report notes that the Salafi mainstream rejects
this form of internal armed jihad as it deviates from the
traditional Sunni notion of deference to Muslim leaders, no
matter how bad.
Drawing on an Al Qaeda statement of 24 April
2002 that sought to justify the 9/11 attacks, Wiktorowicz
and Kaltner also highlight how the salafi jihadis have used
an expansive interpretation of the classical doctrine of jihad
in the sense of just war or defensive war and stretched the
rules of engagement in jihad to justify Al-Qaeda’s global
war against the West. The ICG report cynically notes that
the Salafi mainstream has no "principled objections"
when the salafi jihadis fight a global jihad against the West.
If they object, it is not for doctrinal reasons but for pragmatic
reasons, i.e., wanting to be in line with their governments.
Here ICG is probably referring to the more Wahhabi-influenced
salafis who have an intolerant attitude towards Jews and Christians
for other salafis have taken principled stands against the
global jihadis although these are often qualified by concomitant
criticisms of American foreign policy, as the Wiktorowicz
and Kaltner paper points out.
Looking ahead, the ICG report suggests that
the Wahhabist domination of the salafi movement may be in
question as a result of the divisions within Saudi religious
circles. The paper points out the rise of a new generation
of Saudi Islamic activists known as the Sahwa who are aware
of the need to adapt to contemporary realities and innovate
within the Islamic tradition. They are also less wedded to
Wahhabi dogma in that some of them accept the Saudi government’s
recent, more inclusive approach, including the acceptance
of the Shi’ites, traditionally considered a heretical
sect by the Wahhabis. The paper by Stéphane Lacroix
(Reference 4), which focuses on the nascent revisionist thought
in Saudi Arabia, amplifies this point. It notes that some
of the criticism of Wahhabism today comes from within Wahhabism’s
own ideological core while others are from the broader Salafi
tradition who criticise Wahhabism’s literalism as a
deviation from the principles of salafism.
Comments/Analysis
Recognising the diversity in terms
of outlook, goals and strategy among the Islamists is not
to deny the existence of the doctrine of the ummah, which
serves as a powerful unifying force in the Islamic consciousness.
Islam emphasises that there is a straight path leading to
God and that Muslims should unite in pursuit of that path
and not divide. When they are pushed to the defensive, as
indeed they have been post-9/11, Muslims do tend to be reluctant
to acknowledge the schisms among them or to categorically
condemn acts of gratuitous or indiscriminate violence perpetrated
by those who hijack legitimate pan-Islamic causes such as
the Palestinian issue.
Nonetheless, as the ICG report stresses,
lumping together Islamists of various stripes has served to
make the task of isolating the terrorists harder. First of
all, a distinction must be made between situation-driven jihadis
and doctrinaire jihadis, the former being driven to violence
by context and therefore being amenable to negotiation, unlike
the latter. Secondly, even salafism is not a monolithic movement
and maligning it categorically will be unproductive. It has
evolved from its earlier, more modernist days, taken on a
more puritanical, literalist and intolerant hue with Wahhabist
influences, and is today deeply divided and still evolving.
The schisms within the movement are today evident even within
Saudi Arabia, the heartland of Wahhabism.
I
I
I |
|
