I was not convinced by Michael van der Galien's recent analysis of the radicalization of British Muslims. Citing an article in The Telegraph, Michael writes that British Muslims are becoming increasingly fundamentalist and that their support for terrorism is on the rise. How does he explain this phenomenon? Michael argues that it is "multiculturalism" that has encouraged this radicalization. The British policy of tolerance towards people of different cultures, he suggests, is so backwards that it has led to the increasingly radical views of the British Muslim population.
But is this really so? Is it a policy of acceptance that has led to a more radicalized Muslim community in Britain?
I don't think so. In fact, I haven't found any evidence to back up that claim. What's really radicalizing Muslims, most analysts agree, is not "multiculturalism," but American and British policies towards the Middle East. The brutal occupation of Iraq and the West's unconditional support for Israel are the biggest factors that have contributed to many Muslims adopting more extreme beliefs. Christiane Amanpour, a well-known CNN journalist, had this to say in a January 22nd report:
A piece last October in The Christian Science Monitor made a similar point. "...the West's war on terror is attracting more and more young Muslims to militant circles, say terrorism experts." An article in The Independent reported the same: "British Muslims have been driven towards extremism and terrorist acts because of the UK's part in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the head of MI5."When we reported the unprecedented suicide bombings of the London underground trains and buses in 2005, we were shocked beyond words that young British Muslims, born and bred here, would go to that extreme. We could not understand what would drive them to kill themselves and their fellow citizens. And so we started to investigate what we call "The War Within."What struck us most was how deeply the Iraq war has radicalized today's generation of young Muslims in Britain. Whether extreme or mainstream, they are angry about the war, angry that their country so devotedly follows U.S. foreign policy, angry at what they see as a worldwide war against Muslims and Islam.
Since analysts seem to overwhelmingly agree on this point, it seems like a stretch to argue that British Muslims are somehow being radicalized because of liberal social policies or governmental acceptance of different cultures. There is little, as far as I can tell, to indicate that this is the case. Indeed, it's important to remember that this phenomenon of radicalization has occurred overwhelmingly since 9/11, despite the fact that "multiculturalist" social policies had been in place long before that. Since this radicalization has occurred almost exclusively in the past few years, and since most British Muslims claim to be adopting a harder line because of western policies in the Middle East, I think it's safe to say that it is aggressive US and British foreign policies that have caused this crisis.
8 comments:
While the increase in radicalism specifically in nations such as the United States or Britain can be, in my opinion, largely explained by those nations' respected foreign policies, I believe that your analysis does little to address the growing radicalism found in other European countries. Nations such as France and Germany are now faced with a "Muslim Problem" as a growing number of dissatisfied, angry Muslim youths seek to pull and to disrupt the culture, politics, and peoples of these nations.
While I understand your analysis and agree with you to a point, the rise in radical Islam is not simply an American or British issue. It is an issue faced by nations all over the globe. To ignore other factors encouraging dissatisfaction amongst the Muslim youth, economic failures, lack of education, cultural non-acceptance, and a refusal to integrate, is to ignore what few solutions we may have left before this powderkeg of a problem explodes.
Matthew,
You make a number of good points. I agree with you that there are many factors that have caused Muslims to become more radicalized throughout Europe.
In this piece, however, I was merely trying to address what I believe is the biggest factor in explaining Britain's increasingly radicalized Muslim population. Countless articles that I've read have said the same thing: the US and British foreign policies in the Middle East are causing Muslims to adopt more radical views.
I do agree, however, that education, poverty, and cultural non-acceptance are also important factors, though perhaps less significant ones.
I'm not a fan of the war in Iraq and I'm generally conflicted and confused by much of what's going on here and elsewhere in terms of new strands of radicalism.
But I know this much and hope we all remember that explanations for radicalism don't justify radicalism. There are many reasons why I'm not a well-adjusted person, even in my mid-40's, none of which excuses my periodic anti-social (albeit non-violent) behavior. Similarly, the alcoholic on the road to recovery is taught to take responsiblity, not blame his/her circumstances.
So whatever the reasons, the radicals need to buck up and take responsibility for who and what they are. In the end, they are the primary cause of their radicalism. Yes, certain events can trigger and escalation, but again, there are no excuses for what they do.
That said, I did enjoy this post. Well-written, well-constructed, Jeb.
If anything there has been less tolerance of Islam since 9/11 so logically their radicalism should have decreased.
In socities with better integration of Muslims, such as the US, there have been so far less significant manifestations of dangerous radicalism, than in places were they are more ghetto-ized.
Pete, thanks for your comments. I agree with you that we shouldn't try to 'forgive' this type of extremism. You make the point very eloquently. I do think, however, that it's important to examine why this is happening in an attempt to figure out what can be done to counter these dangerous tendencies.
It's frankly an incorrect assumption. Pete pretty much hit the nail on the head.
To simplify.
If a fire's already started, adding gas to it makes it explode to a greater fire.
however the fire was started to begin with, and that fire took elements to get started.
Gas by itself is unable to combust. Michael was very much correct.
And yours is correct in the only instance that it add's fuel to the fire. But that is where the correctness ends. People may join up to become terrorists due to what they see - however, the underlying base of their situation is the root cause and that is not the US & UK actions in the ME.
Good analysis, but I wouldn't overstate the West's support of Israel as a factor in the rise of radical, political Islam. We've pretty much given Israel a blank check since the 1960s.
The rise of political Islam can be traced directly to the Arab defeat in June 1967 and the corresponding death of Arab nationalism. Political Islam filled the resulting vacuum in the political discourse of the region. When Arab nationalism didn't deliver on its promises, rather, when leaders like Nasir didn't deliver the promises of Arab nationalism to the people, the people turned to a new ideology. The movement has only grown in numbers and radical tendencies since then.
The War on Terrorism and the Muslim perception of a 'clash of civilizations' has contributed significantly. There's no doubt about that.
On its face, I don't necessarily buy Michael's argument. That being said, I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand either. Europe does not have the best track record when it comes to tolerance. That's not to say that the US does, but we have integrated our Muslims significantly better than most of the EU countries. And since 7/7, it hasn't gotten any better. And as long as terror plots are being uncovered or carried out in Europe, I don't expect it to any time soon.
I support Israel, however Israel should not get on the neocon bandwagon. The neocon and Bush-Cheney-Rice lying oil grab in Iraq is what is increasing radical Islam. A byproduct is a backlash against Israel.
Again, Israel should not cuddle up to the neocons, because there could be a serious backlash. And if the neocons could get past their greed, they could deal with issues in the middle east with some sanity. It doesn't help Israel that Russia is fed up with America's violations of international law.
Post a Comment