The crisis in Islam

By Fred Hutchison

World Islam is in a state of crisis. This crisis is one of the reasons that many Islamic nations are at war with their neighbors or having strained relations with their neighbors. It also is one reason why certain groups of radical Muslims regard themselves at war with the west.

Is the west in a world war with Islam? Are we fighting World War III? Not yet. But such a world war might evolve from the present circumstances. The unfolding crisis in Islam will be the a key determinant of whether or not the west must eventually fight a world war with Islam.

Some of the factual information in this essay about Islam is drawn from "Understanding and Reaching Muslims" by David Goldberg, M.Div., who was a missionary to Muslims in North Africa for 24 years, is an author, and is a consultant and gives seminars on Islam. Some information comes from The New World War: A behind the scenes look at why and how militant Muslims plan to destroy western civilization, by John Clark Mead. The analysis and conclusions are largely my own.

Five Kinds of Muslims

The Muslims of the world seems to fall into five categories. I list them in approximate order of numbers of people. 1. Folk Islam, 2. Secular, 3. Moderate, 4. Traditional, and 5. Militant. (My terminology and categories are slightly different from Goldberg and from Mead.) These five categories are found in both branches of Islam — the Sunnis and the Shiites.

Folk Islam includes the Sufi spiritual mystics, superstition, the occult, and good and evil geni. Many Moderate, Traditional, and Radical Muslims also subscribe to elements of folk Islam. Folk Islam is especially popular with those of limited education. Goldberg likens folk Islam to be the larger part of the iceberg which is underwater and visible Islam as the smaller part of the iceberg which is showing above the water.

I have no information on the role of Folk Islam, if any, in the crisis of Islam. I surmise that the occult element of folk Islam provides a channel for demonic inspiration to radical Muslims or corrupt Muslim rulers, but this is pure speculation on my part. However, evil rulers like Saddam Hussein, and terrorist cult leaders like Ossama bin Laden and Yasser Arafat seem to be satanically inspired and some of their followers seem to be driven by satanic energy. We now know that the Nazi party had many devotees of the occult. Some well-informed people believe that there was a link between the occult and the wild satanic enthusiasm of large masses of people for Hitler — who assumed the pose of a demigod on the model of the Antichrist. This strikes me as the kind pattern followed by Saddam, Ossama, and Arafat — and their followers. In Saddam's case, Hitler and Stalin were his heroes. Thus, the capture and humiliation of Saddam had symbolic, mythical, mystical, and psychological importance. The failure to capture or kill Ossama is important for similar reasons.

Secular Muslims are nominally Islamic and go through the ritual motions of Islam in public to keep up appearances. Peer pressure in the Muslim community is very strong and it is very difficult to sort out the conforming secular Muslims from those who are Muslims by personal conviction. Secular Muslims are sometimes very loyal to their community and culture and will faithfully serve in the police and the military. Goldman estimates that Secular Muslims may make up 50% of world Islam. This estimate ignores the huge numbers influenced by folk Islam — a great mass floating beneath the surface of the Islamic world.

Moderate Muslims emphasize the Five Pillars of Islam which are 1. The profession of faith, 2. Prayer, 3. Fasting, 4. Alms, and 5. Pilgrimage. Beyond these basics, moderates emphasize the milder more spiritual early writings of Muhammed (Mohammed) which exhorts Muslims to lead good lives and to be kind to non-Muslims. The mild parts of the Quran (Koran) were the "early revelations" of Muhammed during his sojourn in Mecca (610 – 622 AD). . During this time Muhammed referred to Christians and Jews with the honorific title of the "people of the book." The militant later "revelations" were in Medina (622 – 632). Some moderates are spiritually minded and some are essentially secular when not devoutly attending to religious duties. The transition from secular to moderate Islam and from moderate to traditional Islam can be subtle.

Traditional Muslims are serious about the 1. the Quran (the Koran — the revelations of Muhammed), 2. the Hadith (the collected writings about the life and sayings of the prophet — which illustrate how to put the Quran into practice), and 3. the Shari'a (the path). The Shari'a is drawn from the Quran, the Hadith, the qiyas (analogies) and the consensus teachings of prestigious Muslim scholars. The Shari'a provides detailed guidance for Muslims in every situation in life. The complexity, precision, and comprehensive prescriptiveness of the Shari'a is reminiscent of the more rigorous sects of Orthodox Judaism and classical Confucianism of the court. Some commentators mistakenly refer to Islam as the simplest and most straightforward of all religions. This may be somewhat true of some of the moderate Muslims who stick to the five pillars. But traditional Muslims who propose to live the whole of their lives according to the Shari'a must learn and master an extremely complex system of life — and few excel in this hard path.

Traditional Islam is perpetually in a state of tension. The contradictions between the early mild and spiritual writings of Muhammed and the later militant writings of Muhammed creates a tension. A traditional Muslim usually follows the teaching of a Mulla or an Immam to help him sort out the contradictions. The choice of a teacher will often be determinant as to whether the traditional Muslim leans towards a more moderate path or a more militant path. For example, a traditional Muslim following a moderate path will interpret the word "jihad" as the inner struggle against evil — sometimes called the "greater jihad." A traditional Muslim following a more militant path will interpret "jihad" in terms of the "lesser jihad" — a war for the cause of Allah against the infidels. In some cases, the choice of a teacher will be made collectively by a family, a tribe, or a community. When a traditional teacher turns radical, he may draw an entire community with him.

Traditional Muslims with a militant slant are often be secretly sympathetic to Militant Muslims who are warriors or terrorists — but will often assume the pose of the milder face of Islam for western consumption. Yasser Arafat uses militant language when he speaks to the people in Arabic, but moderate language when he speaks to the press in English. The Muslim world is riddled with this double-think and double-talk. Islam defines lying to be a minor sin. As a result, the double talk is often salted with lies. Thus, treachery and betrayal is endemic in the Muslim world — especially in the Arab Middle East. The propensity to tell and believe lies opens the Muslim community to great deceptions. Seducing and deceiving leaders can cast their spell upon a tribe, a community, or a nation.

Whether or not the conflict with the west turns into a world war will depend to some extent on 1) how much secret support traditional Muslims give to the militants, 2) how many traditionalists convert to militant Muslims, and 3) how many militants get disillusioned with militancy and revert to traditional Islam. A lot of movement has been observed both ways in the last year. The long term trend since 1948 has been steadily increasing conversions to militancy. Significant numbers of disillusioned militants dropping out of the aggressive jihads is something new. It is influenced by disillusionment with the evil tactics of the Militants, by the victory of America and its allies in Afghanistan and Iraq, and by the capture of Saddam. Keep in mind that American victories have a dual effect — new militants sign up because of a pereceived threat to Islam, and militants drop out because of the perception that they can't win. Muslim fatalism (whatever happens has been written by the finger of fate) induces many to give up in the face of defeat.

Defending the Ummah

A major point of debate among the Muslim teachers is what constitutes a threat to the "Ummah" or Muslim community. Mohammed issued a call to arms against the Infidel who seek to destroy the Ummah. Are Christians and Jews the "infidel" or the "people of the book?" Does American culture seeping into the world of cultural Muslims represent a threat to the Ummah? Is the Ummah the local Muslim community or the world Muslim community? Is America's war on Al Quaida or the war in Iraq a threat to the Ummah? The answers which the Mullas give to these questions may well determine the future of Islamic conflicts with the west.

When a devout traditional Muslim concludes the "Ummah" is threatened, he will becomes "political" or militant. He joins those who are fighting a threat to the Ummah. The militants are drawn from every social class. When a prominent teacher goes militant, many of his followers will also go militant. For variety of reasons, those going from traditional to militant have dramatically increased for the last two generations — but the process has been going on for a century or more.

Do not confuse the governments of Muslim nations with the militants. Depending on whether the leader is a cultural Muslim, a traditional Muslim, a Militant Muslim, or a secular pragmatist, there is more or less informal contact between the governments and the militant organizations. Most of militant organization are loose in structure and based upon personal relationships. An organization may guide and aid a cluster of terror cells without any unbroken chain of command between the organization and the cell. On the global scale, the top leaders of the militant organization all know one another and meet together in secret. They coordinate some of their plans together. Because it is secret undocumented, and informal, the whole thing is deniable.

Militant Islam — Perhaps 6% of the Muslims in the world are militant. This mighty not be enough to instigate a world war with the west. If the numbers of militants greatly increase, and if they find more competent leaders, and more reliable support from the traditional Muslim world — would this precipitate a world war? Not necessarily.

Most of militants just want to defend the Ummah. A minority of the militants are seeking world domination by Islam. Thus, militants may be classified as "defenders" or "imperialists." Unfortunately, some "imperialists" can be found at the highest levels of the militant organizations — and push an aggressive agenda. A "defender" might be seduced by the "imperialists" and adopt their views. Or, a "defender" may become disillusioned with the "imperialists" and withdraw from the jihad. It is only the aggressive agenda of the imperialists wing of the Muslim militants which can force a world war with the west. In contrast the militant "defenders" seek only limited objectives through war.

Muhammed and the Militants

Mohammed won converts in Mecca by preaching but he led converts in Medina by military conquest. He ruled Media as a military dictator. This is when he had his militant "revelations." In Mecca, Muhammed exhorted Muslims to lead a good life and be kind to non-Muslims. (Surah 29:4, 2:62, 2:256) When Muhammed began to attack the pagan idiolatry in Meccah, he aroused angry opposition — and he fled to Medina in 622. In Medina as the military ruler, Muhammed taught that faith must be translated into action. He said that Islam must be brought to the whole world. Military success gave birth to grandiose dreams and political designs. Militants use these verses to justify Jihad as a holy war. (Surah 9:5, 9:29, 49:15) For a century after Muhammed's death, the armies of Allah were extraordinarily successful — which gave impetus to militant ideas for the centuries to follow. Through the long course of Muslim history, militant ideas have waxed and waned. Times of prosperity and securely established regimes and institutions have tended to work against militancy. Some Secular Muslims hope that modernization will bring prosperity and peace to the Middle East.

Islam encourages the idea of progressive revelation, to wit: 1. Christianity is a fuller revelation from God than Judaism, 2. Islam is a fuller revelation than Christianity, and 3. Muhammed's later revelations are more authoritative than his earlier ones. According to the Quran, later revelations annul earlier revelations. "And when we put a revelation in place of another revelation..." (Surah 16: 101) This teaching seems to be unique to Islam. The later militant teachings annul the earlier verses which speak of kindness! Allah can and does change his mind! The militants hold a theological trump card!

Muhammed and Pragmatism

Muhammed rulers are often astonishingly pragmatic while posing as devout Muslims. The president of Pakistan rules an unruly populace, heavily salted with firebrand militants. He decided to accommodate the Americans when they invaded neighboring Afghanistan, thus exposing himself as a mere pragmatist. How did he avoid civil war? He gave a radio talk about the practical wisdom of Muhammed. He told a story from the Hadith about how Muhammed made a temporary alliance with the infidels in order to defeat his enemies. The president told his people that he was following Islamic wisdom to form an alliance with the Americans. This pragmatism has allowed regimes such as Libya to suddenly turn from militancy to accommodating the west. It has allowed kingdoms like Saudi Arabia to sell oil and offer bases to America while supporting militant theology and secretly funding terrorist groups. During the war with Iraq, the Saudis publicly pretended to shut out the Americans but secretly gave the Americans a lot of assistance. However, such pragmatic policy changes can be easily reversed or subverted when the times are opportune. If the America military vacates Pakistan, the president might immediately switch back to radicalism. The Middle East is both slippery and sticky. It is slippery in its diplomacy. It is sticky — like a tar baby — when you get involved on the ground.

New Developments

In several Muslim nations, most notably Saudi Arabia, the militant terrorists have bombed buildings. As the militants get less scrupulous about killing Arab civilians, they are becoming more scrupulous in their outrage against pragmatic rulers who make deals with the west. Thus, a civil war between pragmatic rulers and militant purists may be in its early stages. Many traditional Muslims are in an agony about whether to support the rulers or the indigenous radicals. Islam is in crisis.

News reports indicate that in several places, the militant tide has passed its high tide mark and has begun to recede. Many thinking Muslims are getting disillusioned with radical theology. Many moral Muslims are getting disgusted with the bloodthirsty tactics of the militants.

America has had a very bad month in Iraq. Although the insurgency will work to America's military advantage in the long run by bringing the radicals to the surface, America is losing the propaganda war in the Muslim press and the fifth column western liberal press. Muslims who might have given up the struggle based upon a fatalistic view that they cannot win — may have new hope for an eventual Muslim victory because of the slanted reporting of the insurgency.

Perhaps the worst disaster of the war is the press revelation of the American shaming of Muslim prisoners. The worst shame a Muslim can suffer is to be publicly stripped of his clothing. Muslims are the most fastidious people on earth when it comes to the exposure of private parts of the body. Both the Muslim and western press are maliciously and gleefully giving the sordid story top billing. Most of the graphic reports fail to mention that the abusive military police are in a tiny minority and the offenders will be prosecuted in military courts. "American soldiers shame naked Muslim prisoners and photograph them in degrading positions." This is the story that will stick in the Arab memory and imagination. One can hardly underestimate how much of a setback this is to the American image throughout the Muslim world. One can only imagine how many traditional Muslims will go radical as a result of these atrocities.

The fighting ability of American troops is remarkably good. But the American civilian leaders have weak stomachs when it comes to American casualties and tough military initiatives. This seems to be a fatal weakness in the war in Iraq. The militants noticed that after their bloody spree in Falujah, America surrounded the city, promised tough action — and then Washington lost its nerve. The Marines are still sitting there — with only token demonstrations of firepower. Muslims respect strength and have contempt for weakness. From the beginning, the militant imperialists like Ossama claimed that the west is too corrupt and craven to defeat Islam. Thus, the courage of the militants is renewed by American vacillation and the war drags on and on exhausting the patience of the west. Ironically, American fears of a prolonged global war with militant Islam may be just the thing that brings about a global war.

Conclusion

Is there likely be a global war between militant Islam and the west? Well, the whole complicated mess seems to be teetering on the edge of a razor and could fall either way. In my judgement, it is the internal crisis of Islam which will be the determining factor. How this crisis works itself out over the next year may give us more clues to the long term direction of things. Keep your eyes fixed upon the internal crisis of Islam.

© Fred Hutchison