Dreamworlds

Dreamworlds is an instructional well made documentary which demonstrates the sad true reality of the contemporary music video industry. The message transmitted in the music videos is generally the same: the objectification of woman’s sexuality and the veneration of male dominance and control. Women are reduced to a single identity, a submissive passive sexual being. The movie does not portray a puritanical criticism of exposed sexuality but try to get the audience to meditate on how we as a society, accept the denigration of woman’s dignity by using their bodies to sell anything, including CDs.
The documentary is broken down into three parts that are intimately connected. All parts show the patriarchal cultural views which reduce women to their sexuality. Part one begins by stating that since the beginning of industry in the 80s, music videos present provocative images of woman’s body to attract attention. This is consistent in all genres of music. Hip Hop and Rap show prevalent images of violent male sexual behaviors towards women. In Techniques of Storytelling, women’s bodies appear repeatedly with bands, or as part of the audience, or fulfilling the sexual fantasies of men. In Constructing Femininity, our culture according to the music videos, define woman as a sexual being. Being addicted to sex and submissive to men is what is normal for women. Women will do anything to have sex with whoever is available. They will have sex in public spaces or have group sex. Part two starts with Pornographic Imaginary. Like in pornography movies, footages involving erotic encounters between women and use of violence against them are also present in music videos. Disturbing scenes like men throwing food at women’ bodies are disturbing. In Ways of Looking, the narrator explains that the message of what means to be a woman is how well their body can attract and be wanted by men. Part three talks about female artist being trapped in pornographic world. They realize that you cannot sell CDs unless they appeal to the sexualization and exposure of their bodies. They find themselves being pressure to fall into the same cliché. In Masculinity and Control, in order to have a submissive persona the industry needs dominant figure whose masculinity is define by power and control. Sexual violence is showed with acceptance, normalcy and is celebrated because the women in the videos seem to like it.. What values are these videos teaching the young audience who watch them? Crooks and Baur state that “exposure to sexual to violent pornography may have negative effects on men’s attitude and behaviors towards women”1.
One can argue that the narrator does not convey that woman’s sexuality is harmful and evil. It differs from the religious teaching on non-reproductive sexuality as sinful. The movie presents the belief that all people’ sexuality should be celebrated, enjoyed and satisfied. However, it proclaims that it is unethical to present woman’s sexuality as the only meaning of her existence. The music video industry fails to show the other sides of women (intellectual, professional, social activist, artist) resembling the patriarchal mentally which are transmitted by the main religious authorities that reduce women’s role in society to the fulfillment of her obligations at home as mother and wives. Often, this industry combines pornography images with the stories of the songs just because this is what sells, turning the images very predictable and often the same. It demonstrates social construct of masculinity and femininity reflecting an individualistic approach to sexuality. Gender inequality is public being communicated by defining masculinity as the dominant and powerful sex, just like most religions assert.
Dreamworlds invites us to reflect, rethink, and evaluate our approach towards sexuality and gender equality as a person and as a society. If the media is so influent in our popular culture, it is discouraging to belief that we will have a more equal society. After Dreamworlds I will never watch a music video the same way I used to.

Notes
1- Crooks, Robert, & Baur, Karla, Our Sexuality, Eleventh Edition, (2008), Page 520

Sexual Ethics and Environmental Ethics

“Going green” has been a major trend in the recent years. We hear about it every day in the media news coverage, religious leaders’ discourses and political campaigns. In the United States, we witness an increasing public consensus in the importance of preservation. There is a general awareness of how we as a society have disregarded Mother Nature in the last centuries due to the exploitation of her resources. When examining environmental ethics concerns, I find it hard to separate them from any other area of ethics. Whether I think about bioethics, political ethics or corporate ethics, there will always be an issue that will directly affect the natural environment. Our attitude and views on contraception and family planning, sex education, sterilization, gender equality will significantly impact our planet. It is in promoting a sustainable global culture that we can begin to change the damage we’ve made and provide the future generation with a healthy and safe place to live.
Overpopulation is in my view, the number one concern shared by sexual ethics and environmental ethics. Our blue planet is not able to sustain and feed a large number of people. The results of overpopulation are catastrophic to the natural environment. The list is long and includes: air and water pollution, resources depletion and degradation, climate change, toxic and nuclear waste, soil erosion, etc. One way to manage high increases in population is promoting a better understanding of family planning and contraception. In the developed world, we have witness a decrease in family size among the majority. Positive results are due to women’s education, their engagement in the work force and the easy availability and distribution of contraceptives methods, even when the Roman Catholic Church still proclaims the denunciation of their usage. However, in the developing world, much has to be done. Women lack basic education and accessibility and information about condoms, birth controls pills and IUD. Developed world programs intended to prevent population explosion and poverty are resented due to the belief that these programs camouflage imperialism and neo-colonialism (1). In other developing countries, where the government imposes programs to control and reduce population via methods of taxation and forced sterilization, the results are ineffective and controversial. In China, many women die from illegal abortions and many infants are killed due to the one-child policy. In India, when Indira Gandhi implemented a program that required sterilization of men after having a second child, many men accused the government of sterilizing people who had no children or were less educated and members of the opposition. That program backfired because it provoked Indian families to object the use of other methods of contraception and family planning (2). According to the United Nations Population Funds, every minute, 380 women become pregnant: half of them did not plan or wish the pregnancy;110 women experience a pregnancy-related complication;100 women have an abortion, of which 40 are unsafe;11 people are newly infected with HIV/AIDS;1 woman dies from a pregnancy-related cause(3).
It is imperative that we demand world leaders to create a comprehensive program to decrease or contain population growth that contain platform of gender equality and education. This program should focus on offering the public with information about their options of contraception reinforcing people’s rights to make their own decisions according with values and traditions of their culture.

References:
1 Christine Gurdof, Body Sex and Pleasure: Reconstructing Christian Sexual Ethics, (1994) The Pilgrim Press: Page 33
2 UCLA Division of Social Science http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Independent/Indira.html
3 United Nations Population Funds, Annual Report, 2000, Reproductive Health: Meeting people’s needs, http://www.unfpa.org/about/report/2000/2ch1pg.htm

Legitimacy of International Law

I understand International Law as a set of rules that govern relationships and conflicts between states ensuring order and justice. They represent the views of different cultures on how the world should be ordered. These set of rules regulate and somewhat predict the behaviors of states and individuals. In order to be legitimate, they have to be formulated respecting the principle of good faith. Laws that are viewed as representative, inclusive, fair and effective will claim legitimacy and will have a better chance to generate the consensus among states and successful compliance. Legitimacy in International law provides accountability, responsibility and consequences for non-compliances. Because the world evolve and develop in a fast pace, international law has to be able to adapt to changes in a timely manner, otherwise if it gets caught up in bureaucracy, the question of illegitimacy may arise. Liking general consent to legitimacy is erroneous in my view. There is a general agreement that constitutional national law is legitimate regardless the fact that not all citizens abide to national law.
Another point that I would like to make is that the position of government on the legitimacy of international law and on the authority of international organizations influence how its citizens perceive the value of such institutions. The Bush Administration disregard for the opposition of members of the UN Security Council in its proposed use of force and invasion of Iraq and the breach of the Geneva Convention using torture in prisoners of war at Guantanamo, influenced not only how Americans perceived of the effectiveness of diplomacy but also fermented a worldwide question of the efficacy and competence of the UN in moderating conflicts. The Obama Administration has since tried to change American image abroad in how we conduct our foreign affairs. Pres. Obama, in his 2009 speech in Cairo, said “Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible”.
In my view regardless of the inconsistencies of its applications, International law is the path to achieve peaceful relationships and dignity for all human beings.

Sex Education

Sexuality is an important component of life and is a natural part of human growth. Understanding our sexuality contributes to one’s discernment in taking the rights choices regarding sex. However, our society still is tormented by the fear imposed by Christianity that sex is the corrupting source of one’s soul. Thus, sexuality is not a topic that parents and educators feel comfortable discussing with children. The youth is either getting wrong sex information from venues such as friends and the internet or getting no information at all. It is primordial that we demand changes and seriously address this issue of misinformation and provide our future generation with all the knowledge necessary for them to make responsible decisions about their bodies.
It is discouraging to see the recent statistics regarding sexual health of the American Youth. Teenagers are at great risk of contracting sexual transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies due to ignorance of their own sexuality. Most teenagers look for information about sexuality from their close friends. Pressure from friends contributes to engagement in unprotected sexual activities putting their health at risk. Parents are not proactive in starting conversations about sexual health with their children due to taboos, ignorance and the false belief that they have no influence on their children’s behavior. Children feel embarrassed to ask for information from parents and educators in fear of rejection. This cycle of shame only exacerbate bad sexual decisions. The media has also part of the blame in contributing to provoke children in engaging in early sexual activity due massive use of sex images to sell their products. With their higher part of the brain not fully developed, teenagers do not understand the risk they are putting themselves into when they have unprotected sex because of the idea that “it won’t happen to them”.
Informing our children about safe sex practices will contribute to their general health. Understanding sexuality as a whole should be part of the United Nations human’s right. Kids with the proper information can make responsible decision whether they choose to abstain or engage in sexual activity. Safe sex education should be part of every school curriculum so kids can comprehend the importance of protected sex and the contraceptive options available to them. Our society cannot blindly assume that all of our teenagers will not engage in sexual activities even when they were told that abstinence is the best option in preventing sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancies. Abstinence only sex educational programs supported by conservative views in our government do not effectively reduce early sexual initiation, STDs and unwanted pregnancies. Only with a comprehensive sexual education program we will be able to see changes risky behaviors and better the quality of life of teens and prevent long term health consequences.

Sexuality: Constructivists vs. Essentialists

Defining homosexuality, bisexuality and trans persons is a source of polarized battles between social constructivists and essentialists (biological and religious). People in same sex relationships are trying to gain social acceptance to enhance their quality of life. The gays right movement, longing for empathy and understanding, have gain great support by our society in the past decades. Better understanding of our inherent free will should help those who are against homosexuality to appreciate the fact that love sees no boundaries as age, race, religion and gender.
Constructivists understand sexuality as a social constructed reality. It takes into consideration the history and culture of a certain society. Sexual orientation and gender identity is an occurrence external to the person. There are several factors that influence sexuality as biology, culture, religion, politics, family values and individual choices. Sexual identity, orientation and behaviors are influenced by limits set by the society and therefore impact ones choices. Within a society there is a pattern of behavior demonstrating the power that the society plays over its people in conforming with the social norms. Thus, different cultures have different norms on sexuality. Gender roles, regulations of the institution of marriage, employment opportunities are relevant factors in the formation of homosexual behaviors. Homosexuality is defined not universally or innate but in a cultural context and in a given time. Constructivists believe that the person makes a conscious choice about their sexual preference and partners after hearing discourses made by different institutions within the society.
Religious essentialism has its focus on creation and naturalism. Human sexuality is given to us and it is universal and unchangeable over historical time. When one is born, one is either homosexual or heterosexual and there are no variations in one’s lifetime. Therefore, sexual orientation and gender dwell within the individual and it is not a conscious choice. All deviations are morally wrong because they go against God will. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence though abnormal. Homosexual relations are sinful because they are imperfect manifestations of the essences.
Non religious essentialists are very secular. They are also called biological essentialists. The norms are based on human biology. They use social biological explanation to justify several occurrences in sexuality such as male innate tendency to promiscuity due to natural instinct in the preservation of the specie. Sexual desire is biologic driven. Genetics influence sexual orientation in both men and women.
In my view, the constructivists have the broadest understanding of free will. They acknowledge the individual ability in making their choices regarding sexuality. Even if they are confronted with social norms, they still are free to make the choice. This is very contradictory if we are talking about free will which is given to us by our Creator. That implies a religious connotation to it and it would make sense to assign the religious essentialists as the group who better understands free will. To me, it is even more disturbing to think that the religious essentialists who are the ones who claim that homosexuality has a natural causality fervently oppose it.

Sacred Sex vs. Secular Sex

Sexuality is an important component of life and is a natural part of human growth. Public interest in sexuality seems to be at high level. Media is bombarded with programs containing sexual material. The news coverage reflect our society attention to sexual debates such as celebrities’ relationships and affairs, same sex marriage, artificial reproduction, abortion, priest sex abuse scandals, etc. Views vary on how we, as a society, should define human sexuality either as sacred or secular. However, advocating for either extreme can cause problems and can promote discrimination. A careful ethical examination on how we should categorize human sexuality has to focus on finding a middle ground between sacred sex and secular sex to promote and reflect all people’s position.
Judeo-Christian and Muslim religions with patriarchal influences regard heterosexual sex within marriage as sacred. Sex is viewed as a manifestation of God’s gift to human beings first and foremost for procreation. In the last decades, churches have tried to change some of their old traditions where sexuality was understood a carnal sinful act of our body denigrating the purity of human soul. Sacred sex advocators emphasize the importance of identifying sacred nature of sex. The principle purpose of sexual relations should be the respect of each person involved in the activity. Both partners have to fully consent to engage in the sexual act. Sacred sex is also called consecrated sex which aims to bring both partners closer together in a “spiritual” bond. It is meant to enhance the relationship because it will provide a strong sense care for each other. In enhancing personal intimacy, couples will praise each other bodies as temple of their Creator. This sense of closeness will transcend their relationships and will transfer this positive connection to children, family and ultimately to the society as a whole. However, classifying sexual intimacy as sacred can imply a religious meaning to sex and can alienate views of non-religious individuals. This is particular important to individuals whose relationships are not recognized by traditional religious. Such groups are homosexual, bisexuals, non-married couples, etc. It is important to distinguish sacred sex from the puritanical moralist Judeo-Christian traditional values which preoccupied to in dishonor our innate sexual desires.
Non-sacred or secular sex is usually advocated by people who are against traditional religions’ views on sexuality and gender roles. They feel that religions should not be mandating what society accepts as morally right or wrong. Religions punitive sex agenda is viewed as hypocritical because it goes against of what they proclaim as fundamental values such as equality and love. Sacred sex is associated with judgment and blame. Apart from the connotation of religious tone to sacred sex, some sort of “sanctifying” term should be used to associate sexual relation and intimacy with trust and respect. When you trivialize sex as pure carnal activity, we give intimacy an individualist approach. Individual sexual pleasure stays above mutual trust and respect. There is no regarding for mutual enjoyment. It can be used to oppress and abuse the weaker person in the relationship. It has no moral parameter to protect the victims against sexual abuse. The media has take advantage of this secularization of sex. Millions have been made in ads promoting superficial views of relationships and casual sex. Women with “perfect” skinny body and wealthy good looking mid-age men sell everything. However, this non- sacred sex trend only contribute to people feeling ashamed of own body. We are undervaluing intimacy and giving priority they way we look.
To conclude, our society will only come to enjoy the fullness of our sexuality (whether one believe or not that it was given to us by a Creator) when we are able to create a environment where sex is understood as an opportunity to embrace each other with respect and appreciation and the desire to be mutually connected in physically, emotionally and spiritually way. Prejudice and discrimination in sexually does reflect social justice.

“Jihadism ”, 9/11 and the US Encounter/ Relations with Muslim World

The tensions’ relationship between the United States and the Muslim World is not a new subject. However the attacks in World Trade Center and at the Pentagon have aggravated the situation because it brought to our backyard the on-going clashes in the far Middle East. Our leaders backed by the media, deceivably portrayed that the American hope for a safer and prosper world was in danger due to fanaticism among Muslims who hated us because of the freedom we preached. The only way to combat this horrible Islamic threat was by initiating a global war against them. The United State government response to the attacks of September eleven has increased the fear, suspicion and antagonism among Muslims. Military action in Afghanistan and especially in Iraq has contributed to validate extremist groups’ platform in calling for a global jihad against American imperialism in the Muslim world. Unless an unprecedented commitment emerges to reduce ignorance, misperceptions and stereotypes from both sides together, Americans and Muslims will continue to disrupt the so important steps towards reconciliation and the violence preached by a minimal fraction of extremist groups will gain more popularity and will not cease.
The 9/11 events killed thousands of innocent civilians in America by the terrorist organization Al Qaeda. Bin Landen was seen as the evil by us and also he was seen as a hero by some. The ones who saw him as a courageous hero justified his attack stating that he was able to shake the superpower imperialist United States and send a message of hate. The event was an awake up call to all Americans. In one day, we saw ourselves in the reality of what millions of Muslims have experienced in their daily lives. Even though this terrorism attack acted against the peaceful message of the Qoran itself, Islam was somehow described as our enemy and the American people bought the concept. Hence Muslims, by watching the US media propagating the “bad” image of Islam, understood the threat against their religion and the conflict escalated and hurt even more the weak image of Americans by the Muslim world. Years of interventions in internal affairs, the support of the US to authoritarian governments, the disregard for the Palestinian cause, the invasion of Iraq based on forged propositions only exacerbated the Anti American sentiments throughout the Muslim World and the Jihadism movement gained ground to flourish. Al Qaeda was portrayed by the Bush Administration as a transnational well structured organization with hieratical leadership directly led by Bin Laden. Al Qaeda was exposed with no moral values and their main desires were the total destruction of the American society and the imposition of Islam in the world. He also wanted to replaced western inspired secular oppressing regimes in the Muslim world by an Islamic governments ruled by the sharia. The US commission conducted the investigation of the 9/11 attacks as a criminal investigation and focus on the understanding of the plot itself and people behind the attacks instead of focus on understanding the social movement behind it. The report was based on the interrogation of few Al Qaeda members captured by the coalition forces. The report itself did not provide significant information about the organization decision making process or about the main leaders (Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri who was an important figure in the ideological and religious vision of Al Qaeda). The report is very controversial because in using intense methods of interrogation (torture basically), the information extracted from the prisoners is believed by many to be not credible, inconsistent or unreliable. The report was supposed to help us to understand the dynamics of the Jihad movement that provoked the attacks in American and help US policy makers to act according, but it failed provide the information. It is only in understanding the causes that let the globalization of the Jihad movement that we will address the issue assertively. Gerges in The Far Enemy help us to better understand the Jihadism and politics of Al Qaeda. Differently of what was projected by Bush Administration, Al Qaeda is a minimal fraction of the Jihadism movement. Most religious nationalist leaders reject its agenda, strategies, and the use of the violence against civilians. The focus of the religious nationalist was to battle the status quo at home, and not to battle the “far enemy”. Gerges portrays Jihadism as movement that is far from being monolithic and shows the tensions inside Al Qaeda. He argues that since Bin Laden saw their defeat in the jihad at home, transferring the fight globally would be his last beat for his cause to succeed, and in with move he showed the fragmentation of the movement. Gerges states ”Understanding the tension, differences and shifts among jihadis will shed light on how Sept. 11 occurred as well as on the relative weight of transnationalist jihadis and religious nationalists. It will also illuminate the rise of AL Qaeda, its influence within the Jihadism movement, and its potential long-term durability.” In reality, AL Qaeda is not such an organized entity as we were made believe. It was this exaggerated threat presented by the administration that helped the organization to gain popularity and Bush and his cabinet purposively sent the message of an evil empire to gain public support for his so wanted war.
Understanding terrorism in contemporary days has led many scholars to agree and disagree about terrorism goals and operations. Robert Pape, discusses that after 9/11 there was a imperative need of understanding suicidal terrorism. He argues that the cases he studied gave him the assertion that suicide terrorists do not act on religious motives. Rather, it is an ideology to transform the world independently of religion. He state “Terrorists compel modern democracies to withdraw combat forces from territory they prized.” That is the case in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. He argues that never in Iraq occurred suicidal attacks since the invasion. The solution is to withdraw all station troops extracting the motive that causes the suicide bombs from the Middle East and station them off shore to protect American interest in the region. In Contrary, Mark Juergernsmeyer’ s, in The Logic of Religious Violence states that extremists or people who excuse the use of violence in the defense of faith, portray their secular government as the responsible force in advocating anti-religious ideology that threats the traditional way of living. As presenting their faith under attack, militia leaders win individuals adherence to their cause requesting them to have discipline, courage and strength to fight their enemy, if necessary to the end. It is a cosmic battle between truth and evil. Talk is not enough to fight injustice, they are called to act. Leaders’ misuse of religious language legitimizes their cause to overcome human politics and economic problems and to give moral endorsement to their use of violence. Scott Atran in The Moral Logic and Growth of Suicide Terrorism states that suicide attackers today do not fit Pape’s description. Suicidal terrorist are composed by idealist youth inspirited by religious oriented heroes (Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri). Since they are isolated from societies especially in Europe, and with all the spare time available to navigate the Internet and watch television, they incorporate the jihad movement as they can identify social oppression and political repression around the Muslim world with their own lives. They vow that suicide for the cause of jihad is the noblest cause. Atran proves the opposite of our main visualization of “traditional” terrorist as poor, deprived, no other option, criminal and hate freedom stereotype. The suicide bombs in the British consulate and HSBC in Istanbul is an example to disprove Pape’s theory about a strategic political objective as too narrow too broad, outdated, and misleading. The invasion of Afghanistan eliminated the training camps and the disruption of the money flow to Al Qaeda and from Al Qaeda to its militants which degraded it back to a decentralized network of small cells. Today, Atran says “Zawahiri calls jihad everywhere to inflict the greatest possible damage and maximum causalities among the West, regardless of time and effort required or of the immediate consequences.” Humiliation then is a great tool in the hands of extremist Islamist because they produce rage and quest for vengeance in the Muslim youth community. The idea of a centralized Al Qaeda recruiting and leading militants to expel troops is not correct anymore. These young people are inspired by the global Jihad movement (usually from reading “posts” on the Internet), self generated from below, organized by groups of friends. Understanding the group dynamics is the key in challenge it. Jihad cells are small in groups (usually 4 to 8 people). They are individuals with similar characteristics within the group but very different from other cells, and they form spontaneously. The cell members are so united to themselves that individuals are willing to give their lives for their peers. Therefore, it is important to channel religious beliefs to less violent expressions. In fighting this new ideological threat, Mark Sageman in Understanding the Jihadi Networks states “ Develop a coherent and comprehensive strategy by discrediting the legitimacy of leaders and the ideology behind the global Salavi jihad and replacing it with an inspiring vision of a just and fair partnership with Islam.”
The US Administration keeps committing the same old mistakes according to Atran’s To Beat Al Qaeda, Look to the East. In increasing troops in order detain counterinsurgency efforts and to focus on trying to gain popular support for a corrupt government is a proven failed strategy. What is actually happening is that by overestimating the threat of Al Qaeda, we are instigating an increase in Pakistan Taliban surge that is now threatening Pakistan stability and the world. He argues that the war against Al Qaeda has to be local, and that it will only work when the West realize that what unify the terroristic networks are cultural and familial rather than political ties. Europeans have been successful in preventing plots doing exactly that tracking links among local extremists, families and friends and improving relations with young Muslims immigrants.
Pres. Obama’s speech in Cairo was a true ground break in the reconciliation process. American image has been damage so much in the Muslim world that only an address by the president in a Muslim country could break the ice and set a new tone. The Bush Administration made so many mistakes that people around the world would not be willing to listen to Americans if there was no change in the administration. I believe Obama was very successful. His speech was truly a remarkable piece of diplomatic “re-commitment” owned to the Muslim community. It assured that his administration was serious about a new beginning where diplomacy would prevail. Differences will be spoken and discussed at public level. America will remained behind its most cherished values of freedom, democracy and justice. Human rights will be again priority and he proved that American will not be hypocritical about it with the closure of Guatanamo Bay Facility. He assured that America is not in war against Islam, since Islam is part of our own history. We will go beyond the definition of our relations with Muslims based on our differences and work together in our shared principles of tolerance and dignity.
Religion is too important and influential today to be ignored by the US policy makers. Agents in foreign policies have to engage religious leaders in other to advance its agenda of promoting human rights and democracy. Cairo was crucial, but we need to move to action, otherwise the speech will be soon forgotten. Religious leaders can be important allies in the resolution of conflicts and the achievement of global peace. The moderate voices in Islam are being shut down because of our fear of engaging in dialogue with religious leaders. It is our common goal to eradicated extremists use of violence against innocent people. There has to be a unified effort to educate members of public and private sector about religions. Acknowledging achievements of religious leaders in social programs could help to break down misconceptions. Providing participation in government by religious leaders would also help to bring their knowledge and agenda to the government. The Report of the Task of Force on Religion and the making of US foreign policy suggest an American Muslim as ambassador to the Organization of Islamic Conference and encourage ambassadors who work in countries where religion is important to be knowledgeable about them.
The responsibility for peaceful coexistence is in the hands of United States and Muslims leaders equally. We need to re-build trust, respect and understanding. If we cannot achieve a common ground, the danger of further conflict escalation is great. Our immediate action has to be the better use of diplomacy and dialogue. Solving the problems together will stop the violence. Americans have to live up to values we advocate to avoid perceived cynicism and resistance among the world community.

Islam and the West in Time and Space: Perceptions and Encounters

After reading Augustus Richard Norton’s “Hezbollah” and better understanding the contemporary developments in Lebanon, I was very curious to find out more about the history of one of my childhood favorite uncles. Raffet Miguel Aun was such a joyful “tio” to be around. I remember how he used to greed me as soon as he heard my voice entering his house saying “taaaaliiiiiitttaaaaa”. He used to make the most delicious Middle Eastern dishes including my favorite “raw” Kibbeh. Last week, I e-mailed my cousin Susan and I asked her if she could send me information about my uncle Rafi and I was most curious to know about his ethnic background and why their family migrated all the way from Lebanon to the small city of Passos, a predominantly catholic city in the south of Minas Gerais state, Brazil. She wrote me back saying that she knows very little about her father’s past (he passed away few years ago). The few facts she knows come from what her grandmother told her mother (one of my mother’s nine siblings). Susan said that her paternal grandparents migrated to Brazil in search for a better life and she stated that her grandmother hated when people in our city called them Turks, since they were Christians and not Muslims. It was very interesting to me to find out this sad part of my uncle’s life because it probably meant that religious misinterpretation affected the way Christians conservative predominantly in the city mistreated him by labeling him Muslim or Arab due to the way he looked. It also showed me that because of ignorance of Islam, the sentiment of Anti Arab / Muslim is not particular only to the US or Europe as the readings of this week focus on, but is also extended throughout Latin America. This confirms the effects of centuries of stereotypes in our outlook toward the “other” religion and unless we break this vicious cycle of mutual repugnancy, achieving respect and peace will be almost impossible.
How do we start breaking the vicious cycle? The key is education or public diplomacy in both Muslim and Western societies. In my view, to start to wane Anti Muslim sentiments, we need to expose to the West all the luminous and rich contribution of Muslims scholars to the birth of the Renascence period. We need to move beyond focus in the history of conflicts, which it was degrading to both West and Muslim, and restored the true historical episodes of the Middle Age. I remember in my secondary school years how the teachers referred to the Dark Age as a period where Europe was stagnant, with no presence of any intellectual contributions to the European civilization. I learned that the Dark Age was marked by invasion of barbarous violent Muslims who occupied Mediterranean Europe through horrible bloody conflicts until Catholic King Ferdinand and Isabella saved Spain and returned it to their Spaniards. The BBC documentaries “An Islamic History of Europe” and “When the Moors Ruled Europe” tell the history of our western civilization in its totality of events. When Muslims advanced to Spain, they found cities in crisis and widespread chaos. Muslims were welcomed by Visigoths. The Muslims in Andaluz were responsible for transforming the European civilization in a very significant way. They brought with them many innovations in science including astronomy, medicine (surgical instruments), poetry, public works (Cordoba was a cosmopolitan city, had street light, sewage system), agriculture (irrigation system), architecture, mathematics (numerals) and many more that revolutionized the lives of local people. They brought Greek philosophy books that had been lost in Europe and they were importantly involved in the translation of this books and commentaries from Arabic to European languages. This period is known as “convivencia” where Jews, Christians and Muslim not only were able to peacefully co-exist in the same place but also respected and worked together in the translations of these different texts. People from all over Europe came to Spain and especially to Toledo to participate in this intellectual phenomenon took home all the new ideas. However, Muslim intellectual contributions and many conversions to Islam was too threatening to the Christian land the Crusaders decided that it was time to end the Muslim “occupation” of Europe and the history after is known. What is not often said is that Muslims were massacred and there was little resistance from them. Inquisition could not live with infidels and all Muslims were expelled if not assassinated. What happened in Spain, also happened in Sicily where there were major contributions of Muslims but with no recognition. In Paris, due to the Arabic translations and most important the many Muslims commentaries on Greek philosophy and Aristotelian discussion of the relationship between faith and science and that idea that even when reason and faith contradict themselves, they can co exist, is considered major contribution to the Renascesse. More impressive than learning how much the Muslims were responsible for the birth of western thought and how ahead of us they were is the fact that we reconstructed our own history for political matters. We cannot progress if we continue to eliminate Muslim evident imprint from the history of western intellectual science. Islam since then has been permanently harmed.
In our contemporary time, nothing seems to have changed. Global terrorism seems to be one of the dominant subjects of our daily lives. Most of our worries however are based not in truth facts and the misconceptions about our enemy deter us from finding solutions in helping the world to become a safer place for our children. Islam became source of all evil according to the majority of westerns. Works of recognized scholars like Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis, have inspired policy makers to exacerbate the tensions between Muslim and Westerns. Huntington focuses on his conclusion of the eminent clash of civilizations. Civilizations that are destined to clash cannot seek together a common ground. Islam is beyond redemption. Islam is viewed as incomparable to Western values and we are under a cultural war. Us versus them, battle of good and evil, same mentality of Cold war prevails in US policy maker. To me this is all non-sense and US policies reflects exactly that as Esposito in Clash or Coexistence? states: “ This fear of Islam leads to the belief in a monolithic Islamic threat that requires massive Western political and military power”. Islamophobia has erupted since the events of 9/11 and Muslims all over the world are suffering from discrimination, harassments and injustice. Racism is view wrongly especially in the United States but Islamophobia is somehow not categorized as racism. We witness an increase of intolerance in anything related to Islam religious beliefs. However, persecuting Muslim is not going to help to solve the issue of terrorism. We need to look beyond the simple implication that Islam is the fundamental cause and understanding why extremists are gaining grounds and the context behind it. Let’s put ourselves in our fellow Muslims world citizens’ shoes.Years of economic failures by authoritarian governments in the Muslim world; US intervention in internal affairs and support of oppressing government, the situation in Iraq, the unresolved Palestinian occupation by Israel are important political factors to be reconsidered. The ongoing attack on Islam will not help Muslims to ignore the issues I listed. The more we attack their beliefs the more resentment we will create, therefore validating extremist popular slogan as the West who hate Allah and Islam. In my view, empathy is a key strategy. When we apply empathetic thought towards Muslim, we are able conceive to understand their request for the creation Islamic state with the implementation of the shariah. Religion is the pillar of society and the shariah their warranty of justice. With predominantly totalitarian governments, Islam becomes the way out of oppression. Feldman in Why Shariah? clarifies it “Shariah is not just a set of legal rules, it is something deeper and higher, representing the idea that all human beings and governments are subject to justice under the law”. However the mainstream media portrays the shariah as the evil fundamental law that cuts hands off when person commits a theft. Political commentators like Daniel Pipes has also contributing to ample the ocean of mutual misunderstanding between Muslims and Americans. People like him project an image of Islam as a monolithic religion disregarding the vast politically, economically, culturally, linguistically, racially, and religiously diversity in the Muslim world. All Muslims are presented as fanatic fundamentalist ready to bloody hijad against West core beliefs of freedom, democracy, modernization, secularization of the West. This is proven to be false as Muslims admire the West equality, freedom of speech and religion. Muslims do not dislike Western values what they do not agree is US policies towards Muslims where they feel we see them as inferior when try to dominate Muslims countries. This was clear to me when in the Roundtable discussion with the Morrocan women delegation last week, the Morrocan women got very defensive when one of the students asked them if Morrocan society was open to accept Modernization. They unified in their response saying that whenever they are asked about Modernity, which to them is a concept impossible to be defined, they see echoing an implied sense of judgmental inferiority towards their society. In Islamo-Christian Civilization, Richard W. Bulliet states “There needs to be an occasion for affirmation of principle of inclusion that represents the best in American tradition.” If we include Islam in our civilization based on historical facts we will stop to conceder it as the malevolent other especially because our animosity have been created by Christendom. It is important to find tolerance with our Diaspora Muslim community when we are absorbed by the fear that discourages us reproaching each other to find social and religious inclusion. The media has had an enormous impact in contributing in the xenophobia against Islam. It is proven to be a chain of mutual deception. Husain in Global Islamic Politics states “new and views are put forward, opinion pools reflect the media’s news and views, published pools are then highlighted by the same media to indicate “public opinion” and naturally, the White House responds to this public opinion”. This results in fueling the extremist predicament that the West is in war against Islam and validates their use of violence to defend their faith against the secular West.
Prof. Monshipouri lectures on Human Rights was very informative because he stressed the importance of engagement of governments in the Middle East in talking with the international community about the problems of Human Rights. Some countries have signed many international conventions of protection of human rights and he said that this is a major step accomplished. There is a consensus in the Middle East of a world demanding an improvement in the dignity of human beings. Middle Easters see human rights as community rights and social justice different from the individual rights approach we in the west advocate. He also state that sometimes it does not mean that a country that signed an international convention actually implements it but at least the governments are become aware of its importance. The stressed that Islam has nothing to do with the problems that the Middle East face in dealing with human rights issues. The problems he listed usually lays on power struggle associated with oppressive government maintaining his totalitarian power. He mentioned at length the inexistence of popular participation in governments. He says that there is no such thing as fair free elections in the Middle East. He talked about the problem with minorities and especially the suffering of the Kurds. Women rights were also mentioned and he stressed the importance of women to get organized as a group and protest their rights at government level. He mentioned something extraordinary happening in the Middle East which is secular feminist and religious feminist getting together to talk about preventive methods of domestic violence. His conclusion was that education is also the best ally in advocating human rights accompanied by political and economical development.
In conclusion, our efforts should be to educate our society about Islam and make evident their contribution to the West. Islam is not our enemy and indeed it can be a powerful and effective tool in reverting the cycle of terroristic violence. I will try to make a difference within my family in sharing this essay with them and asking them to find out more information about their ancestry and to eliminate any misconception that still be carried along the way. This is the morally right approach to follow; we own this to our Muslim siblings.

Revival: The Iranian Revolution, State Building, Social Movements,
and Islamic trans-nationalism
In media news coverage this past week, there was a great deal of attention dedicated to the French decision to ban the Niqab veiling in public spaces. The government decision to prohibit the veiling in order to protect women from being demoralized because of religious traditions sparked debates around the globe. This event exemplifies how contemporary western societies are reacting to the visible religious revivalism, in this case Islamism. In my personal opinion, the proposed ban, which is scheduled for final vote in September, is not democratic hypocritical and discriminatory because it takes away the right of a women to freely choose to express their religion and I also believe that the “real” reason behind this law is the increasing fear of a worldwide Islamic movement. Therefore, this kind of legislation will only encourage more resentment between Muslims and the west, whose relationship has been apprehensive since the attack on US in 2001, invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, and decades of Israeli Palestinian conflicts. These events have fueled extremist revolutionary Islamist groups, inspired by the success of the Iranian Revolution, to use any pretext to validate their violent Jihad against the west secular values.
The significance of Islamic Revolution in Iran and the magnitude of its impact in contemporary global politics is unprecedented. The goal of the Iranian revolution was to disintegrate a secular and pro-west government and institute an Islamic state ruled by God’s law (the shariah). After the independency from European colonialism, the majority of Muslim countries were ruled by Muslim Secularists who envisioned transforming their nations into modern states using western ideologies of secularization and modernization which are incompatible with Muslim traditionalism. In case of Iran, the autocratic shah government overthrew populist and nationalist Mossadegh from power with the help of the United States (due to its interest in relation to strategic military location bordering ex USSR) in 1953. Many scholars state that Anti-American sentiments in Iran started from this event. The Shah pushed a plan to modernize Iran, nationalizing many private companies, implementing an extensive land reform program, westernizing society and imposing centralization of his government. The Shah autocratic monarch ruling suppressed the participation of cleric establishment in government. Iranians were disappointed by the Shah government because its failure in socio cultural political and economic areas including providing economic equality among population and continuing his Israeli trade policies. This exacerbated a decrease in his popularity and protests, which were encouraged by clerics and seen around the country. With the advice of the United States, Pahlavi’s regime strongly oppressed peaceful demonstrators and as many as fifty thousand were killed. Ayatollah Khomeini, who was actively involved in the opposition’s discourse to the shah’s program of secularization and westernization, was exiled to Iraq and then moved to Egypt and France. Exile served Khomeini very well because he was free from censure and able to propagate his call for an Islamic revolution in Iran. His followers created a system of information distribution in Iran that enable his written anti-government sermons and taped speeches to be shared throughout the country. By then, millions protested on the streets holding Khomeini’s posters and were willing to sacrifice their lives for a government change. The Shah presented his last plea to Iranians promising to form a national government with free elections, but the Iranians had “it” with him and totally distrusted his promises. With no choice, He left the country in Mid January 1979 when Khomeini heroically returned from exile and established the theocratic Islamic government capitalizing antiforeigner sentiments. His inner circle of Revolutionary Islamists Shi’ah ulama ruled the country by the precepts of Islam with Khomeini as their supreme spiritual leader. Their first most important tasks were to reform Iran’s legal system, cultural institutions, education programs and economic system to conform to Islam. They institutionalized the Islamic Revolution and created the Islamic constitution with the shariah law. The United States embassy hostage crises showed the world the Iranians’ xenophobic anger against Americans instigated by their leader. The US government was stunned by the success of the Islamic Revolution because it never gave importance of the role of religion relation with politics in Muslims society. Americans were unprepared to deal with the new government in Iran. This was clearly emphasized by the taking of American diplomats as hostage for 444 days. Iranian students invaded the US embassy in retaliation to Americans permitting the shah to seek cancer treatment in the US, who underestimated the improvement of Iran-US relations after the revolution. The failure of Carter’s government in resolving the issue, demonstrated the world that even the superpower US was vulnerable and could be defeated. In the BBC documentary we can evidently perceive the expression of fear, confusion and frustration of Pres. Carter dealing with Iranians in his televised address the nation regarding his unsuccessful military operation in attempting to rescue the hostage. This impact was beyond the boundaries of Iran. It sent a message to all Muslims, living under the rules of secularist autocratic leaders that there was hope. Khomeini used this event to show the entire world that he would not tolerate any outside intervention in his government and he also encouraged all Muslims to rise against their secularist pro-western government. He indeed was successful and his revolutionary ideals inspired the resurgence of different Islamic militants groups throughout the Muslim world. The hostage crises backfired at Khomeini because in violating international laws he isolated Iran, which was consequently categorized as terrorist state. The world condemned him and even religious leaders in his inner circle were against his position in the hostage crises. Many Muslims including Shi’ah perceived his radical position as prejudicial to the image of Islam. In this context, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran and the war lasted eight years. Western countries took Iraq’s side, including the US who provided military equipment to Saddam Hussein. Iran suffered immensely from the war with hundreds of thousands dead and financial problems. Members of Khomeini’s government insisted in the Khomeini authorization of the UN proposal for a cease fire that was signed on July of 1988. Khomeini died on June 3, 1989. Iranian leaders were sucessful in providing a peaceful power transition, which is also evident in the BBC documentary. Ayatollah Khamenei was appointed the new spiritual leader and Rafsanjani was sworn as the new president. Both leaders were less radical then Khomeini in their foreign policies and advocated the importance of re-establishing relationships with the West. In 1997, Khatami won the elections with 70 percent of votes defeating his conservative opponent. Iranians supported Khatami’s ideals of reform, especially regarding freedom of speech. In his address to OIC, he said that Iran was entering a new era and embraced the idea of maintaining peace and tranquility with other nations. In the BBC documentary it was very interesting to see the willingness of the Iranian government to share intelligence information with the Bush administration in the Afghanistan war. Whether this was done purely by interest of the Iranians in having Americans deal with the Taliban for them, it is exceptional that information between these two rival countries was exchanged. However, the reformist leaders in Iran were stabbed in their back when President Bush included Iran in his “axil of evil” during his State of the Union address in 2002. This caused major opposion to Khatamis and modernist Islamist government in Iran and ultimately opened many wounds in the Muslim people aggravating their anti-American feelings. Iran has shown the world their role as an important political player, being a mediator or external support
The conflict between Palestinians and Israel has also helped increase the revival of Islamism and sympathy of their cause by the Muslim people. The prolonged and unresolved issues regarding the situation of Israeli settlement in Palestinian West Bank and Gaza, and the occupation of Golan Heights and the quest for Jerusalem are fueling the disapproval of Secularist leaders and support for radical Islamists groups. When Israel defeated the Arabs in the Six Day War of 1967, Arabs leaned on Islamism to cover the sentiment of lack of identity, inferiority and most importantly sense of hopelessness. Religious activism was the only remedy to authoritarian secularism. In the 1973 somewhat successful Arab invasion of Israel, the effort was perceived in the Muslim World as victorious and generated a religious symbolism of God’s deliverance. Islamists constantly remind their followers that Islam was the only way to defeat their enemies. Yasser Arafat, the leader of the PLO tried to secure the Palestinian State through several diplomatic talks with Israel (including the famous Madrid Peace conference and Oslo Document of Principle which resulted in mutual recognition between Israel and PLO), but was not successful to reach the final talks. The situation is worse since the PA is has been unable to control the extremist groups’ attacks on Israelis. Likewise, Jewish extremist attacks have further accelerated the process of Islamism. The election of Hamas (defined as a terrorist organization by Israel , US and EU) was a worried subject among westerners.
Lebanon has also been a country with significant emergence of Islamic movements. Based on the inspiration of the Iranian revolution, Hezbollah is a revolutionary Islamic group that is also being admired by Shi ah and some Sunnis throughout the Muslim world. Hezbollah popularity has concerned secularist groups in the Arab world because they are afraid that inspired by their accomplishments, will inspire opposition groups to call for a revolution within their countries, especially where division among sects are not predominant and increases the pan-Islamic desire. Hezbollah has also been admired among revolutionary Islamists due to its military power against Israel. Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 to finish with the PLO base and to install a pro-Israeli government in Beirut. When Israel was welcomed in the beginning of the war by Lebanese Christians and Shi ah who did not want the presence of PLO in its territory. However, as causality occurred with the war, they started to fear Israel especially because Israel refused to leave even after they expelled PLO from the region. Hezbollah (whose members in leadership had study in Najaf or Karbala in Iraq and were inspired by the revolutionary commitment to political change) and Islamic Amal started a jihad campaign against the Israeli occupiers. Iran played a vital supporting role for Hezbollah who not only consulted with Iran’s leader for advice but also received financial and military assistance. Syria also had interest in supporting Hezbollah since it would be a way of preserving Syria alliance with Iran. Hezbollah claimed that the ultimate responsible force for the Israeli retaliation on Lebanon was the United States who has in its mission to inflict suffering upon Muslims. In Hezbollah’s open letter, it stated that Lebanese government were impregnated with corruption as a product of western imperialism so their goal was to terminate any influence of imperialist power in the country. It justified the use of violence and liberate Palestinians from the Israelis without accepting negotiations (this explains the connection of Palestinian movements and Hezbollah who does not validate the efforts of PLO in making peace with Israel). With the increase of Israeli casualties in the war, by 1995 Israel retreated from most of Lebanon. Palestinians observing that Hezbollah had success against Israel, convinced them that revolutionist Islamists were more effective than the current negotiation attempts done by their secular leaders. There is an important difference between Hezbollah and Hamas illustrated by Norton in his book Hezbollah “Whereas Hamas in Palestine has intentionally targeted Israeli civilians, such as with suicide bombings, Hezbollah usually did not do so over the course of Israel’s long occupation in Lebanon.”
The French ban on veiling reported in the media this week demonstrates the fact that we in the west are terrified by the revival of Islamism. We keep walking the in circle of ideological threat instead of admitting that Islamism is the only voice that millions of impoverished and oppressed Muslims have found to trust and live for. What will it take for us to recognize this cry? Unless the western government and especially the US bring to an end its hypocritical support for governments which ignores human rights, inequality, democracy, improvement of economic development, extremist groups will continue to gain support among frustrated hopeless Muslims.

Islamic Revival: Origin, Typology and Evolution

After the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center in 2001, it is common to hear, especially in the media, the connection between political Islamic activism and jihad against the west. It is assumed that all Islamists are fundamentalist groups engaged in the holy war. This misconception has not only harmed the image of millions of Muslims who reject any violent act against innocent civilians, but it has also discouraged our determination in creating a global environment where people with different religion, ethnicity, race, language can peacefully co-exist. Therefore, it is imperative that we, the future International Relations professionals, advocators of peace, understand contemporary Islamic revival movement so we become instruments in eradicating misconceptions against Islamists within our community and we engage in a dialogue of mutual respect and tolerance as Prof. Piscatori stated “we need reasonable voices”.
The Islamic revival is considered one of the most important social movements of contemporary time. It transformed Islam into a social ideology bringing hope of a change to followers. It preaches the realization that something went wrong. Islam is a religion that arbitrates all aspects of the faithful life. Religious and political responsibilities are considered equal. Islam being a historical religion preaches that God alone is responsible for the design of the human history. Muslims see history as a instrument of learning. Islam is also an organic religion. Religion is equated with society and provides a complete set of moral rules upon which individuals are to act and to follow when socially interacting with others. The shariah is the force of law. It has a divine origin, integrating the worldly realm with the sacred realm. When the governance of a nation, enforce laws that go in contrary to the divine law, Muslims feel obliged to engage in political activism. Thus, Islamic political revival has gained importance today due to years of political influence of the West. In this western influence, secularization and modernization is viewed as inconsistent with Islamic main beliefs which do not accept the separation of religion from the political, social and economic realm. Muslims feel that they were taken hostage by the secularist rulers inspired by western values and they see Islam as their only refuge. Islam then becomes a significant political force. The Islamic engagement in political activism is a matter of survival. The discontentment of Muslims is not only due to the fact the secularization has been advocated and implemented in the nation-states after independency, but also because of the increase of social and economic inequality with the concentration of the wealth in the hands of the dominant elite. This social injustice goes against the principles of Islam. The result of this discontentment is an ardent desire among its people to build an Islamic state with leaders that will be able to bring back the principles of justice and equality restoring the dignity of the Muslim people. This “taking action” is what the West misunderstands when it talks about the Islamic jihad. Jihad means “to struggle”. Prophet Muhammad stated that the greatest jihad was the individual struggle against himself in following God’s right path. However, there are two other jihads besides the personal jihad. The ummaic jihad is to realize the social and economic equity and justice promised by Islam. The martial jihad is intended to protect the integrity of Islam representing the struggle against unbeliever oppressors. It should be merciful and moderate using force only to restrain attackers. This is precisely where extremist groups abuse the Islamic principle and tradition.
Islamic revival can be noticed because of the increase of interest in establishing Islamic system. Islamists encourages the propagation of sociocultural, legal, economic and political spheres of Islam to society preaching the importance of performance of the five pillars of faith, dress code and veil for women, segregation of sexes, ban of alcohol, gambling, nightclubs, prostitution, and pornography, to name few.
There are three typical categories of Islamists, people who have influenced the revival of Islam: Revolutionary Islamists, Traditionalist Islamists and Modernist Islamists. Revolutionary Islamists, sometimes referred as fundamentalist, are radical, puritanical and support political activism and strict observance to the fundamentals of their faith. They campaign to establish Islamic state imposing shariah in society and to rebuke anything that degrades the principles of Islam. They believe that the ideal Islamic state was created and ruled by Prophet Muhammad and the first four caliphs. Consequently, the principles of the classical period are to be reinstated. Tawhid (Allah’s oneness) is essential to them. It is vital the extinction of secularization since without the ethics of Islam, government is unjust and corrupt. The main purpose of Islamic state is to implement the shariah. Revolutionary Islamists reject taglid and proposes Ijtihad, to Islamic scholars of theology and law. They believe that one of the reasons for the decline Islam is the Traditionalist Islamists dominant dogma of taglid. Revolutionary Islamists also oppose secular nationalism, preaching that this notion of territorial nationalism would divide the ummah, and go against the principle of Islamic universalism. In last decades, some Revolutionary Islamists agree that it is acceptable to apply modern values in Islamic society as long as they conform with the fundamental believes of Islam. An example is acceptance of democracy, as long as Islamists ulama advise elected representatives and revise all legislation. Prominent Revolutionary Islamists are Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhad, puritanical Muslim cleric who started the Wahhabi movement preaching simplicity and piety of the Islamic classical period. Hasan al Banna founded Ikhwan al-Muslimun (the Muslim Brotherhood) and is still a strong influence for Islamism in Egypt. Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi was the founder of Jama`at-i-Islami (The Islamic Association or JL) is South Asia, is an organization dedicated to the creation of an Islamic state after Maududi’s model. Last not least, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the symbolic leader of the first Islamic Revolution in modern times. He’s inspired Islamists worldwide and fortified global Islamic revival.
Traditionalist Islamists are the second category of Islamists. They consist mostly of conservative devout ulama and are normally Islamic scholars, sharing the anti west sentiment with the Revolutionary Islamists. They preserve all Islamic believes and traditions of the classical and medieval periods, tolerating Sufism, mysticism, folk Islam and local customs. They believe that all customs in Islamic society are expression of faith. Normally they discourage political activism and especially violence unless the Islam appeared to be in danger. Sunni Traditionalist Islamists advocates taglid and rejects ijtihad. The rejection of ijtihad is due to the fact that independent thought in legal matters would assault traditional values. They adhered to fatalism because all events are believed to be the Will of God. Believers were discouraged to rebel against political rulers and seek refuge on their faith. Therefore they oppose secularization and modernization but because of their disengagement in politics they tolerate the separation of faith and politics. There are viewed by the other Islamists as ignorant and they do not engage in political crusade. Prominent scholars are Ahmad Raza Khan Berelvi from India was one of the most prominent scholars of the Barelvi school promoting folk Islam. Ayatollah Kazem Shariatmadari founded the Dar al-Tabligh Islami (House of Islamic Propagation) propagating traditional apolitical activities
Modernist Islamists is the third category of Islamists and their goal is like the other two categories, which is to preserve the integrity of Islam but also incorporate intellectual and scientific process of the modern world. They do not share the anti western sentiments with the other two categories. Modernists are devout Muslims knowledgeable about Islam and exposed to modern non-Islamic ideas. They preached tolerance and insisted that it was vital the reconciliation and unity of the ummah. Because they believe that Islam is progressive, dynamic and rational religion, taglid is rejected and itjihad is extremely proposed. They advocated the revision of the Islamic law, which were created long time ago and need to be updated to accommodate modern political, economic, social, cultural and legal conditions. They believe that Islamic decline lies in the hand of the Traditionalist Islamists ulama. In this essence they are receptive all non-Islamic ideas that would be favorable to prosperity of Islamic state. Prominent Islamic Modernists are Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani is considered the father of Islamic Modernism envisioning to establish pan-Islamic regimes free from imperialism and colonialism. Muhammad Abduh supported the idea of adapting Islam to a changing world.
Muslim Secularists have governed Muslims nations since their independence from European colonial rule after World War II. Secularists believe that Western intellectual thought, secularization and modernization is the desirable path for progress in the Islamic world. Most of them were educated in Western secular schools. Therefore they lack knowledge of Islamic tenets and consider them impractical advocating that the ulama should be responsible for all matter of religion in the nation but leaving legal, economic, political and international affairs in the hands of government. They usually called themselves defenders of Islam but do not fully practice their religion. They are members of the elite controlling wealth and political power. They emphasize western ideals of territorial nationalism discouraging the concept of Islamic unity ummah. They have not been successful in many areas and the Muslim world has lost confidence in their rulers. They have not been able to address the problem of economic inequality and the gap between the wealth elite and the majority impoverished population has increased since independence. This has created among the popular mass a sense of mistrust of the western ideologies of capitalism, nationalism, secularism. To cope with the frustration, Muslims have turned to Islam for harbor. Perceiving this phenomenon, Secularists have used Islamic symbols to obtain popularity and support for their programs. However, the misuse of Islam have worsen popular discontentment since Islamists and they followers understand the hypocrisy of their government. In general, Muslims states are living a general developmental crises (legitimacy, penetration, distribution, participation and identity), but is the identity crisis that understood as major problem. The ambiguous dilemma between popular dream of the unified Muslim world and the prevalent commitment in building a stable modern nation-state by Secularists is causing popular unrest. Therefore the regimes are adhering to the use oppression and force to sustain their vision of secular nation-state.
Prof. Farhang Rajaee lecture discusses the present state of the Muslim mind. Modernism brought to the Muslim world the politics of mobility. It instituted in power, military and foreign rulers attempting to run society by force. These rulers planned to “convert the society” towards the age of capital and therefore they were unable to be identified with Islamic culture. Consequently, Islam became primarily the political force enabling Muslims to defend themselves. After the 60s, there was an increase in extremists ideologies to revolt against the source of the decay of Muslims society, the west. Prof. Rajaee calls it the “triangle of violence”. In reaction, to the emergency of the ideology of terror, there has been a Post Modernism intellectual dialogue inquiring the meaning of the Islamists movement. They are engage in the humble attempt to understand life. This is relevant and unique because it has developed by Muslim scholars outside the Middle East in the attempt to rethink Islam. Prof. Piscatori discussed in extent the problems in Iraq today and how they reflect the general problems of Muslim world. The lack of unity between the Islamists, the influence of extremists in aggravating sectarian divisions, the “new Cold War” between Shias and Sunnis, the influence and support for radical leadership in the region by Iran, fragmentation of views and ideologies, all of these factors does not leave much room for success of Islamists movements.
It is important to examine the different categories of Islamists because they are directly responsible for increasing popularity of political activism. In understanding their agenda the West should hear the voices of the oppressed and help to them to overcome corrupted government, despite their commitment to carry on US interest in their countries. Our effort should be in revert the image that we created of Islamists as fanatic terrorists and encourage them to work together to achieve a prosperous future.

International Relations Paradigms, Religion and Islam

Since the occurrence of the events of September 11th, it seems that our daily lives are saturated with reports of religious violence. We are constantly reminded by the media and government that we are in a continuous state of war against an evil enemy consisted of extremist religious groups. This threat to peace has transformed our lives in a very significant way. Most importantly, it has brought to our attention the importance of the role of religion outside of our secular system of living and the essential need of understanding religious worldviews if we desire to achieve of global solidarity.
International Relations (IR) is a field that has a secular foundation and is theorized in the United States with state-centric paradigms; therefore, it does not give enough importance to the social relations among people. In IR mainstream, religion is considered a private matter of the individual, and therefore religion is not included in its theories. However with the late widespread of the global resurgence of religion, IR scholars are been confronted and challenged to re-examine its theories. In my view, it is inevitable that the studies in IR will have sooner than later to encompass and contribute to the study of religions. With this framework, Kubalkova, in her text “Religion in International Relations The Return from Exile”, suggests the creation of a subfield in IR called “International Political Theology” (IPT). She argues that in today’s world, there is a greater need by individuals for the search of meaning of life. There is a special general attention paid to the inner voice, to the feeling rather than the thought, and all that is based on religious antecedents. We are living in a time where individuals feel a loss of identity. This identity crisis is believed to be exacerbated by Globalization, which with its secular agenda dictates that humans will find self fulfillment by acquiring material means. To understanding “meaning”, IR scholars have to re-direct the line of thought that took social science to the wrong destination, secularism. The best approach to religion in IR is from the context of Rule Oriented Constructivism (ROC), which we can begin to surpass ontological and epistemological restrains and take social science studies to embody the fullness of human experiences. Secular humanism, secular nationalism, modernism, empiricism, structuralism does leave room for the appreciation of religious experiences. On the contrary, ROC affirms that humans in general have the ability to reason. Religion itself is a rational choice. Therefore, institutions in different religions have been socially constructed with revelation of the divine. Believers make a rational choice in adhering to assertive rules. Religious believes come before reason in the mind of the faithful and thus they control reason. This is usually misunderstood by secular scholars as nonmodern, primitive and irrational. In addition, it is believed by many that religious figures historically have successfully assisted the resolution of international conflicts due to their trusted reputation among believers. Constructivism consequently is a realistic way of accepting people’s culture in the pursuing of religious preferences, a vital component of the individual reasoning. IR needs to move away from labeling religion as bad or good and dedicate special attention to its role in world affairs and its significance in how we construct the world around us.
Mark Juergensmeyer’s Holy Orders Religious Opposition to Modern States exemplified the importance of re-evaluating religion in the contemporary world. He states that since the attacks on the World Trade Center, religious activists have shifted their target from other religions to our secular government. This is true not only in Islamic extremists groups but also in American Right Christian extremist Timothy McVeigh who bombed Oaklahoma City Federal Building, Buddhist terrorism nerve gas attack in the Tokyo subway by Shoko Asahar, to name few. All these assaults redefined the enemy, which is not only the secular government but an increase in acceptance and adoption of secular lifestyle and value systems among nations. With the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, there is an increase in popularity for the aversion of secular ideology throughout the Muslim world. Thus, such extremist groups gain acceptance within this context and an increasing anti-modern/ western support gain grounds, justifying the use of violence to combat this war of truth and evil. Extremists by default reject the separation of church and state and the secularization of politics. Therefore they become political activists with a religious framework. It is difficult to overcome this “cosmic war”, because the rewards for martyrdom are beyond our worldly existence, so there is no need for compromise. In the same way, United State leadership has used the same linguistic terms to address this conflict. We often are reminded of the war against evil. Thus, it is unrealistic to disregard the political power of religious ideology and the desire of obtaining supremacy in the global arena by the extremist terrorist organizations. Additionally, globalization is responsible for changes in the political and social life. Fundamentalists see secular globalization and modernization a sort of new American or western imperialism. With Globalization, the European Enlightenment idea of national social contract lost its authority because people are connected economically and socially to other nations and ethnic groups causing a sense of lost of identity as described before. Therefore, the goal should be a realization of a sense of belonging in the global civilization.
Richard Falk’s Worldwide Religious Resurgence in an Era of Globalization and Apocalyptic Terrorism start by explaining that after the Cold War, Islam as a religion is the leading challenge to the west world order based on constitutionalism and advocating a strong private sector economy in the achievement of progress and prosperity. This antagonism against secular politics projected the image of the America as the Great Satan trying to enforce its liberal views and abolish traditionalism in the Muslim World. In the G8 meeting in 2001, a movement against Globalization arose and it protested against the policies based on American values, claiming that they are discriminatory, antidemocratic and with socially unfair claims. After 9/11, the declaration of war against the West by Usama Bin Laden’s extremists group projected what Falk calls “experience of apocalyptic terrorism religious overtones”. In Falk’s view, we are in danger of a civilization war and the significance of religion to this issue cannot be overlooked. It is important then to extend religious integration in the debates regarding global governance. However, secularism has a long path in accepting the introduction of religion in forming patterns of such governance. Secular and religious scholars have to abandon the predisposition against each other to mutually and respectfully contribute to construct humane forms of global governance. Today, there is a frustration among the south hemisphere with the existing world organizations. For the traditionalist world, global order is a concept taken with a great sense of skepticism due to the agenda of exclusion of religion in its political imagination. Globalization has proven to further separate people, marginalize the poor, increase a nonsustainability of environment and the contractions of self-realization with consumerism. Falk calls the current global governance as “Global Inhumane Governance”. The resurgence of religion is attributed to the lack of creativity of the secular world to solve problem in the global political domain. Inclusion of religion bring to the table of humane global governance debates a realistic social and political basis, mobilizing movements that challenge injustices, bringing sense of legitimacy to popular culture, increasing a sense inclusiveness and solidarity, and pursuing the achievement of fundamental needs of humanity as peace.
Ole Waever’s World Conflict over Religion: Secularism as Flawed Solution discusses “political solutions to cultural conflicts”. It is noticed the importance that religion is given in global security affairs. It is crucial to secular scholars to come to realization that they are part of this conflict, not above it as some perceive. Secularism cannot continue to present themselves as part of solution or conflict resolution with the pluralistic idea of a place for everyone. Secularism is not a single principle, because it needs religion to define who they are. This is exactly what the religious part is fighting against. It is very undemocratic to me this notion of imposition of a secular culture as the self-righteous way for a peaceful global society. The Muslim world has a vision of America as morally decadent and that is precisely the biggest threat. As Europe embarked in the same ideological fashion, where secularism is established, the Islamic world is frightened of the anti-religions agenda of the “dominant” world.
Piscatori’s Islam in a World of Nation States, The theory and practice of territorial pluralism describes the majority of Muslims as being conformists (accommodating themselves to the prevailing political reality, accepting the West nation-state). In Classical and Medieval Theory there is a basic push for all Muslim to recall the unity they feel has been lost. Islam support pluralism and calls for a peaceful coexistence between the Islamic community and the Non Islamic one. Muslims accept the idea of territorial sovereignty and the modern state system because of its history. Some scholars argue that Muslim rulers showed little interest in diplomatic relations with the Westerns because they were centred on themselves for centuries but is historicallt known that these same rulers had no problems with having formal diplomatic relations with non Muslims when it was necessary. There are treaties dated back to the Prophet himself, following with Byzantine, and even with European Christians during the Crusades. The Ottoman Empire history is marked by innumerous accounts of conformist’s adaptations, territorial pluralism and peace with the infidels. From treating non Muslims as equal as Muslims and the institution of the first constitution in a Muslim nation shows that Ottomans demonstrated flexibility in formulating agreements to promote peace and allowed European influence in internal Muslim affairs. Persian also demonstrated regular diplomatic contacts with Europeans, Russians and Americans. In India, Muslims Hindu and Christians practices inter-community harmony was encouraged. Therefore, throughout history many treaties were made between Muslims and western nations and diplomatic agreements between Muslim nations among each other contradicts what many Muslim and Western scholars position of what Islam would allow. Another implication to be considered in the Muslim pluralism is the acceptance of the separate power centres within the Islamic umma and the territorial ambition by neighbors Muslims. In the late 20th century, there was a movement towards the emergence of local nationalism and Arabia regions was divided into a system of nation-states and the new state needed to secure international recognition. The local elite sought great power recognition; validated peace and friendship with infidel powers; and the relationship with the neighbors territories was based on European norms of interstate conduct putting in second the concept of umma. Muslims understood that their acceptance of the interstate model was due to their inferior position to the Western imperialist. Commitment to national pluralism was demonstrated by the importance of the League of Nations. The League sanctified the territorial and political independency of every member. With this commitment of the participation in the international arena, national divisions among Muslim were consequence on the independence and integrity of one’s own territory. The Inter-Muslim relations are to acknowledge the spiritual and cultural unity of the faith preserving the reality of territory divisions.
Muslims today accept the grounds of the international systems because there is an agreement among the Islamic scholars and the educated elite which perceive the concept of nation-state as a natural occurrence in human history or even essentially Islamic. The approval of the territorial pluralism conveyed the acceptance of national pluralism when the nationalism was brought to the Muslim world in the 19th century. With the European imperialist gone, Muslim scholars still support the “old” idea of territorial state of affairs to maintain the religious circumstances. With the influence the ulama and the elite in society, the general population has adhered the positive nationalistic agenda supporting of the nation-state. Muslims today defend the concept of international relations and pursue of international peace.
In order to accomplish realistic discussion regarding the achievement of a global society committed to human rights, we the students and future advocates of IR have to give the importance deserved to the discipline of religious studies in order better understand this important aspect of human relations.

Male initiation rite in Australian aborigine

In Australian aborigines’ culture, an individual’s main purpose in life was to maintain contact with their ancestors and supernatural beings. Tribe members saw themselves as spiritual beings in the search for the reconnection with the sacred world. Past, present and future were directly linked in a never ended continuum. This belief came from the myth of “Dreaming”. In Dreaming, spiritual babies would enter their mothers’ womb, meaning that birth was the act creation. Dreaming beings are responsible for creation and death.
The rite of male initiation was meant to duplicate creation with a continuing flow of life giving power. One of the purposes of the rituals was to transform the boy into a responsible adult able to understand and communicate traditions to future generations. He was transitioned to a new phase of his life and discovered his true spiritual identity. Through the religious rituals the boy, with the help the elder men, was supposed to be united with their ancestors and the supernatural beings. After initiation, he adopted a new role in the group abandoning all things related to childhood, including dependence on a caretaker, lack of responsibility and purity. The child in him would die and the adult would be born, thus he assumed a new social and spiritual role.
The male initiation rite was extensive and would take several days or months to be completed. At the time of puberty, the boy would be segregated from the group. During this time apart, he would receive training from his teachers about religious belief, history of his tribe, moral values, harmony with nature, sexuality and many others matters. Circumcision was important and very symbolic. The act of discarding a piece of his physical male body meant transition to a new life. Other body operations were commonly performed to represent rebirth. Scarification and sub incision was frequent among groups.
It is fascinating to discover how rich and profound this culture finds their relationship with their Dreaming creators and ancestors. Rites are full of meaning and they exist to keep the group together as they seek wisdom from supernatural beings and a life of harmony among themselves and with their land. Initiation rite exemplifies that when boys would transcend their condition as children and acquiring a new life as a full member of his tribe. For aborigines in Australia, rites are essential to meaning of life, connecting them to Dreaming beings.

Islam, Religion, History and Civilization

The accurate understanding of Islam and Muslim traditions in our contemporary world is vital. The events of November 11th, 2001, the ongoing conflict in Palestine, and the United States war against global terrorism, especially in Afghanistan, convey a great attention to the Muslim World. My own perception of Islam was limited to what has been portrayed in main stream media with the latest developments of these conflicts. I. was confused about the Islamic religion for many years due to my unfamiliarity with its doctrines. I have also generalized all Muslims to the beliefs of extremist Islamic groups and their engagement in the jihad (holy war) against the West civilization. Seyyed Hossein Nasr’s “Islam, Religion, History and Civilization”, was a fascinating reading that changed my whole view on Islam. I became aware of the true meaning the Muslim faith and appreciated its peaceful message of Unity (Ummah) of all God’s creation. I now value the richness of its doctrines and in particular their people’s love of God.
Islam is not only a religion of the Muslim world, but a way of living. Islamic religion is intertwined with every aspect of Muslim’s daily lives. Islam is the fastest growing and second most practiced religion in the world today with approximately 1.2 billion followers spread in all the continents. In Islam, God is called Allah (Arabic). Allah is The Only One Eternal and Absolute God. Muslims profess their faith (Shahadah) by stating that “there is no God but God” in their daily prayers. This negative statement is very particular to Islam. It recognizes God as the One who is the Being beyond beings, surpassing all of our human comprehension. He is given ninety nine names or attributes, which are also the ninety nine beads in the Muslim rosary. The faithful community believe that by saying these names of God (God the All Merciful, The Giver of life, The All Powerful) will bring their hearts closer to their Creator. Allah created the world and all human beings and Muslims are to surrender their lives to Him. Being completely submitted to God’s will is their main desire.
The second most important belief is that The Prophet Muhammad received the Word of God (Quran) through revelation. The Quran is God’s final message to His creation. The Prophet received his first revelation by the Archangel Gabriel when he was forty years old. The Prophet is not divine (like Jesus is understood in Christianity) but is viewed as the perfect human, the last prophet chosen by God to bring the news of salvation. Thus, Muslims see the Prophet as their human model and all people must strive, following the Prophets teachings, to find God’s straight path. Muslims will be judged by Allah (The Just Judge) on the Day of Judgment when the existence of the world will come to end. Besides the sacred text Quran, Muslims also follow the Sunnah, which is an account of the Prophet’s deeds and also the Hadith which are his sayings. Both were recorded by the Prophets’ companions. Hadith are the major source of the shariah law.
Muslims are to follow the five pillars of faith (shahadah, salat, zakat, sawm, and hajj). Shahadah is the profession of faith where they acknowledge the existence of God and the revelation of the Word of God to the Prophet Muhammad. Salat is the daily prayer. Muslims are to pray five times daily in a ritual meditation (before sunrise, midday prayer, afternoon, evening, and night). To me, this is most interesting of the pillars. I was raised Roman Catholic and was encouraged to always pray to God, but not in such a disciplined manner. In this away, Muslims really demonstrate their engagement with their religion and their commitment to establish a close relationship with their Creator. Friday congregational prayer is also required and has a significant social impact. I was disappointed not to find in the readings any mention of women’s participation in this communal prayer service, but I will further investigate. The third pillar is the zakat. Muslims are called to give money to the poor, needy and to different institutions for the propagation of the faith. Swan is another pillar of Islam. Adult Muslims in good health must fast during the lunar month of Ramadan from dawn to dusk. In my opinion, Muslim sawn is a “harder” sacrifice than the Catholic fasting. In Roman Catholicism, we are also called to fast on Fridays of lent but we can consume water and bread. Muslims are prohibited to have anything to eat or drink until evening. The last Islam pillar is the Hajj. Muslims are to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca (South Arabia) once in their lifetime if they have the financial means to do so. According to images from the documentary “Inside Mecca”, every year thousands of Muslims travel to Mecca to do their pilgrimage as the Prophet Muhammad himself did. The pilgrimage dates back to Father Abraham and is not only a physical voyage to the holy city but also an inward voyage towards finding the realization of God. Pilgrims enter a state of purity and are encouraged to keep a sense of peace. Hajj unity Muslims from all over the world where they meet to perform the different rituals, to praise, worship and pray in thanksgiving to Allah.
Islam was give to humanity by God in the revelation to the Prophet in the 7th century CE. The Prophet was born in Mecca in 570. He was regarded a very just and honorable person from a very early age. Prophet Muhammad was always faithful to the One God. People would consult him and he was called “the Trusted one”. Khadijah was his first wife and they had many children. While retreated in the desert for prayer, he received his 1st revelation from Archangel Gabriel and began his mission proclaiming the belief in One God. Mecca did not accept His message since people adored many gods and the Prophet migrated to Medina to escape persecution in 622. This event called Hijrah marks the beginning of Islamic calendar. Medina became then the first Islamic State. Prophet was himself the ruler of the community. After ten years in Medina, Prophet Muhammad had gained many followers from all over Arabia and was able to return and conquer Mecca. His revelations continued until he passed away in 632. His ability to unite tribes from all ethnicity and people that spoke different languages with various religious beliefs was remarkable. After his death, Abu Bakr, was chosen the first Caliph and two years later Umar Ibn Ul Khattab was appointed his successor. His caliphate lasted for ten years and Islamic faith spread throughout the world, preaching the message of love, unity and peace. Muslims were being converted in Mesopotamia, Persia, North Africa and Palestine and East Asia. Uthman was the third Caliph and during his leadership the Quran was finalized and distributed to the Muslim world. His successor was Ali, who was the Prophets’ son in law (married to his daughter Fatima). There was then a great division among Muslims in the acceptance of Ali. He was assassinated together with his two sons. This event was mourned by Shi’ites (Muslims in Iran and Iraq) and Islam was the divided. Up to today Sunnis and Shi’ites have not been able to agree on many issues, but it is very interesting to read in Seyyed’s book that even though Shi’ites and Sunnis belong to a different sect, they still consider themselves as one people, all brothers and sisters united in the name of Allah.
In the Middle Ages, Muslims played a leading role in many spectrum of science. This period in Islamic history is called The Gold Age. Muslim intellectuals expanded Greek philosophy and Sufism was born and has influenced the world philosophy in a very profound way. Muslims were pioneers in Mathematics, art, architecture, ethics, astronomy, and medicine to name few. It was very new to me how much Islamic thought influenced the West and European schools of thought and all in my years of studying, professors never transmitted this important part of our history.
Another very interesting fact learned from the readings was the fundamental importance that Muslim people attribute to the interconnection of religion and state. It is very difficult for me to even perceive such a combination. However, with the readings I understood why Muslims insist that God should not be put aside in any aspect of life, especially in regards to norms and regulations dictating their daily activities. For Islam, the Shariah is as essential to them as the constitution is essential to us. Thus, what we believe in the west will never be applied to them precisely because of what they believe. It is clear now that even if we think that a secular judicial system is the best and fairest way of governing a society, to Muslims this goes against obeying God and following his commends at all times. It would be discriminating to assume and try to impose on them our Western way of thinking. It is no wonder why some Muslims hate us and want us far from their territory.
It is also important in the context of contemporary conflicts to understand the meaning of Jihad. Prophet Mohammad talked about the biggest Jihad, or the Jihad of the soul, which is the “struggle” that humans face to walk straight in God’s path. Jihad is an important duty of the Islamic faith. However, some extremist Islamic groups which constitute a minimal fraction of the entire Islamic civilization have used Jihad to validate their war against the West using violence. The use of violence, especially with the death of innocent people is fundamentally against the teachings of the Quran and Hadith.
Achieving global peace will depend on our ability as human beings to understand and mutually respect different traditions and different beliefs. All sides will have to cooperate and develop a plan of acceptance. Before then, there will be a continuous conflict between traditionalism and modernism, east and west, Muslims and Christians, secular and spiritual.