Research Paper Using Selected Resources On Terrorism And Islam (Research Paper Sample)

By Name
Course
Instructor
Date
The 'Monster' of Terrorism
By definition, terrorism is a term with political and religious ties. According to Hiddad and Hilal (813), the politicization of Islam in Muslim States has encouragedanti-American sentiments which exemplify both the role of politics and religion in perpetuating terrorist activities.A study conducted by Abdullah (1063)found out that Muslims are divided on whether these attacks are committed in the name of Islam or out of criminal interest that contradictthe core teachings of Islam. The latter group viewed the terrorist attacks as politically instigated rather thanreligiously motivated.
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attack and the subsequent terrorist attack in different parts of the world are reminders of the failure by the west and the world in general to engage with the Islamic world in a meaningful way. In spite of the fact that U.S is a home to nearly eight million Muslims, Rasheed and Liu (635) argue that “many Americans remain ignorant or largely suspicious of this group of people.” The US government’s response to the 2001 attack clearly portrays how the matter was approached from a communal angle. Owing to the fact that all the terrorists were from middle-east countries Muslims became the target of suspicion (Haddad and Hillal 816; Stubbs 120; Mamdani 766). Stubbs (121) highlights that immediately after the attack, it was estimated that six Muslims, Arab Americans and Sikhs were killed and in 2002 more than 800 violent crimes were committed by other Americans against Sikhs, Arabs as well as other individuals from Middle East. For a long time, attempts to understand Islam has been largely deterred by the grand, generalization by western nations that defines what can and what cannot be thought as well as spoken regarding Muslims as well as Muslims.
Nonetheless, it is important to acknowledge that the relationship between ant particular religion and its tendencies to either support or challenge the status quo is moderated by a variety of contextual factors. Some of the factors mentioned by Silberman, Higgins and Dweck (770) include “the level of compatibility between a given theological tradition and its tendencies to either support the status quo or challenge it; oppositional relationship between church and state; the interests of elites who control the religious institutions; the secular interests and the class position of the individuals to whom religious movement appeals or attempts to appeal….” As a result, even within a specific religion, it is possible that individuals may act differently depending on their interests.It is therefore not surprising some Muslim clerics may decide to work with terrorist groups and promote deliberately crafted sort of religious messages that do not reflect the actual principles of the religion.
In nearly all religions, extremism has increasingly become a big issue. From the surface, the connection between terrorism and extremism appears patent (Iannaccone1). However, a deeper scrutiny, suggests that this is not always the case. For many years, religious organizations have enormously contributed in provision of health and educational services to many communities across the world. That is to say, in societies that are functioning well there is no religious organization that would gain from violence. It is therefore no true that the activities of religious extremists are grounded on theologies of hate because if that was the case it would have been much easier to get rid of religious terrorism by eliminating the theology as well as its supporters. However, it is evident that the actions of religious extremists are not motivated solely by religious reasons. Referring to Mamdani (767),in order to understand the rise of Islamic militants and terrorist groups, it is important to trace their history. By doing so, one would be able to understand the political dimension of terrorism. For instance, a study conducted by Hildad and Hillal (825) revealed that the Sunni Islamic militant group largely endorsed the September 11 attacks because of the west’s interference in Lebanon. Furthermore, Abdulla’s (1073-1074) study disclosed although the attacks were conducted by terrorists, the consequences of the attack would largely fall on innocent Muslims.
However, the United States of America needs to be careful in fighting the political monster of terrorism lest it thereby becomes a monster. Prior to the September 11 attacks, terrorism and Islamic extremism was actually not considered by the US government as a major threat to its national security. Thereafter, Islam began to dominate the US’s national security as well as foreign policies. According to Aziz the attacks revealed the nation’s susceptibilities and created intense hatred and fear toward terrorists and distorted the America’s view of Islam as well as Islamic groups. Even so, Aziz does not believe that there is sufficient reason to humiliate all Muslims. Within the United States, there are significant shifts in both civil as well as societal consciousness. Some of the freedoms that were previously accorded to all accorded to all citizens are gradually being replaced by increasingly pervasive scrutiny within a framework of repressive social control mechanisms (Aziz). Research indicates that religious profiling targeting both institutions as well as individuals has begun to take root in the United States. This is evidenced by police raids that have been carried out in mosques while Muslim affiliated institutions are regularly subjected to searches and close observation (Douglas95). Oftentimes, these searchers are propelled by distrust, a skeptical attitude and lack of ability torecognize the distinction between Islam as a religion and terrorism.
Even though the attacks were condemned by the majority of Muslims and Muslim leaders across the world, this does not seem to convince the rest of the world of the distinction between Islam and terrorism (Abdulla 1078). This because after the September 11 attacks even the American Muslims who had nothing to do with the attack but were also devastated by the event suffered from hate crimes (Stubbs 121). Perhaps this explains the view held by Silberman, Higgins and Dweck (779) that “religion is a double-e...