“Religiously motivated to the extreme, Islamists usually rally around charismatic religious leaders for guidance and motivation,” wrote Yossef Bodansky in his 1999 book, Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America. Contrary to common claims that Islam means peace, this House Taskforce on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare director emphasized the role that political power plays in legitimating Muslim leaders past and present.
Osama bin Laden and his Saudi Arabian homeland exemplified the importance of might along with any Islamic conception of right among Muslims during their longstanding struggles with an ever more dominant Western civilization. After helping win a jihad against Soviet invaders in Afghanistan in 1989, bin Laden returned to Afghanistan in 1996 in order to turn his sights on the other, last remaining infidel superpower, the United States. As Bodansky wrote, bin Laden
settled down in the Taliban’s Afghanistan and established a system of camps and training sites. The aspect of territorial rule in the Imarat system established bin Laden as a leader—an emir—even though he lacks formal religious education.
“Bin Laden’s emergence as an emir amounts to recognition by the Islamist leadership that he is a unique leader and an important mujahid. He was now called Sheikh bin Laden, a title of honor among Muslims,” Bodansky added. In the eyes of bin Laden’s followers, this honor was well deserved. “The fact that no previous terrorist leader of any ideology dared to confront the United States so directly testifies to bin Laden’s resolve and dedication,” Bodansky noted.
Bin Laden’s status was notable, Bodansky observed:
Historically only a few men lacking formal Islamic education have been recognized as leaders, mostly on the basis of their piety, knowledge, and unequaled contribution to the progress of Islamic and Islamist causes through military means—the jihad. One of these men was Saladin, who defeated the Crusaders and liberated Jerusalem.
Jihad’s nature meant that such leaders preferred fanaticism over philosophy, Bodansky explained, for jihad is a
holy war undertaken to further the rule of Islam over contested lands, particularly Muslim lands occupied by non-Muslims (any land ever conquered by Islam is considered its forever) and lands with a significant Muslim population controlled by non-Muslims. These leaders have elected to demonstrate their Islamic credentials with extremist interpretations of Islamic law. The extremists have amputated Muslim civilization from its future and condemned it to an eternal isolation.
Bin Laden fit for Bodansky a recurring pattern in Islamic history whenever Muslim leaders used military power to strengthen Muslim societies in the face of non-Muslim threats and influences:
Having consolidated power by the strength of their swords, the new conquerors-turned-rulers had to prove their uniqueness—their “Islamness.” They revived religious extremism as the source of their legitimacy while accusing their enlightened and sophisticated predecessors of causing the Muslim world’s earlier defeats.
This demand for purity suppressed any liberal, enlightened tendencies Islamic societies might have developed. As Bodansky explained,
incited and excited by the lure of brute force, the community of believers willingly agreed to abandon and deny its own cultural and scientific achievements and commit itself to a process of self-destruction that still unfolds.
Bodansky traced the continuity of this thinking throughout Islamic history:
Aspiring to power, new generations of extremist and militant forces have repeatedly demonstrated their supremacy by ordering the destruction of cultural treasures of previous generations. For example, in 1192 the ulema—the religious leadership—in Cordova, Spain, publicly burned the books of the main scientific-medical library including a rare study of astronomy, because these books were a “horrible calamity” to Islam. And in 1979, following the Islamic revolution in Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini issued an order ensuring the Islamization of the higher-education system. Student committees, composed of hard-core Islamist activists, complied by evicting leftist activists, both students and faculty, from the campuses and then supervised the Islamic “correctness” of both the material taught in classes and the research conducted by the surviving faculty. Finally the government closed the universities between 1980 and 1983 to complete a proper Islamic approach, that is, the elimination of all departments and courses the mullahs considered un-Islamic as well as the banishment and at times arrest and execution of all the related faculty.
Writing in 1999, Bodansky saw a similar negative relationship between Muslim brawn and brain. The global Muslim community “is in a transitional period of historical significance. On the one hand, the Muslim world is on the defensive against the penetration of Western values,” he wrote. “On the other, the Muslim world has embarked on a strategic ascent made possible by the acquisition of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other strategic capabilities.”
Bodansky highlighted hereby Iran and Pakistan:
Pakistan and Iran are plagued with acute, seemingly insoluble socioeconomic problems. At the same time because of their strategic developments—the acquisition of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles—Pakistan and Iran are perceived as the leaders of the strategic ascent.
Given Islam’s inherently Arabic, ethnocentric basis, Bodansky saw further incentives towards militancy for these two non-Arabic nations. For Iran and Pakistan, “with the predominance of Arabism in Islam, both countries need a major achievement to demonstrate to the Arab world their right to power and leadership.”
Bodansky’s historical review reveals disturbing themes in Islamic history. Any weakening or reform of Islamic doctrine often results not in mellowing of societies but rather in a pious backlash. Thus, zealous militancy in the name of preserving pure Islam displaces moderation, as a forthcoming article on Pakistan will examine.
Ren says
Islam is a religion of bullshit, period.
gravenimage says
Particularly harmful bullshit, Ren.
Walter Sieruk says
It should be mentioned that this above jihadwatch article had used the so called words “Islamist” as well as “Islamism.”
Therefore is should be reiterated that those are fake the those are fake words that had been made up after September 11, 2001 in order not to order or upset non–violent peaceful Muslims.
As for the hoax of bogus word “Islamist” a a realistic term word for such a person would be the “violent jihadist” or “Muslim terrorist.”
Concerning the other false used which is “Islamism” that pseudo “word” is both absurd and strange.
As the current President of Turkey ,who is a devout Muslim had well said that “Islam is Islam.
In addition , this article does mention about “the common claim that Islam means peace,”
That claim nothing but outright disinformation . If a person will take any good reference book or dictionary printed before September 11, 2001 and look up the word “Islam” he or she will discover that the word “Islam mean s submit.” Not the word “peace.”
Likewise if person attempts look up in a dictionary or reference book printed before 9/11 that person will find out the word ” “Islamist” and “Islamism.” is not found anywhere. in those books
So let’s get real a start calling a specific kind of person or thing for what he or it actually is.
gravenimage says
Walter Sieruk wrote:
It should be mentioned that this above jihadwatch article had used the so called words “Islamist” as well as “Islamism.”
Therefore is should be reiterated that those are fake the those are fake words that had been made up after September 11, 2001 in order not to order or upset non–violent peaceful Muslims.
……………………
Walter, I take your general point–but since Yossef Bodansky who is quoted here wrote his book in 1999, the claim that the term “Islamist” was not invented until two years later is clearly mistaken.
I wish that everyone was as savvy about the threat of Islam as Bodansky was over twenty years ago–you may, of course, disagree.
Walter Sieruk says
To gravenimage, thank you for taking the time to reply to my posting and giving men additional information .
This is in mind that awful word ” Islamist;” might had originated awhile some time before 9/11 Nevertheless those horrendous events which occurred on September 11, 2001 may well have been a catalyst for that terrible word to become more popular for the reasons stated above.
By the way the different books that I have read in the last century about Islam including my collage books on Islam ,when I took a class course of world religions didn’t contain such dreadful words as “Islamist ” or ” for that mater “Islamism.”
gravenimage says
Walter, I agree that “Islamist” is often–but not always–used to whitewash Islam itself, as though “Islamism” were somehow different from Islam itself.
Walter Sieruk says
This article is again a reminder that Islam has no concept o separation of religion and State. So a person ,is unknowingly repeating himself or herself by using the term “Political Islam.”
For one misconception that many Westerns have is that of the term used in the West which is “political Islam.” That term is nonsensical and redundant as well as unknown in the Islamic world.
Therefore it needs to be made clear as to why that Western term is nonsensical and redundant. As explained by two statements.
First, as for that term being nonsensical one devout Muslim who, truly, proclaimed “Islam is Islam.”
Second. as for that term being redundant, has been well explained by none other Ayatollah Khomeini who declared” All Islam is politics.” [1]
[1] THE ISLAM IN ISLAMIC TERRORISM by Ibn Warraq page 332
gravenimage says
Islam’s Religion of Power
……………..
Islam is all about power used against any who oppose its hiorrors.
OLD GUY says
Yes Islamic leaders want to control the world. And guess what it has NOTHING to do with religion. It has everything todo with POWER and GREED. Islamic rule of the world would set mankind back hundreds of years and would result in the death of millions.
jewdog says
Since Islam was invented in the eight-ninth centuries during the Abbasid caliphate with the aim of justifying and regulating the Arab conquests, power is in its DNA. Everything from military aggression to slavery to the oppression of the weaker sex and children via honor killings screams power. It also explains why there is so much hatred of Israel, whereas abusive China gets a pass: it’s the humiliation of being defeated by a mighty mite.
Kenneth J Johnson says
REFERENCE Islam and Islamist. Our language changes, accept it. Do not be like those who encourage political correctness by inventing words., or who change the meaning of words . KEN
gravenimage says
Sometimes our language is changed by those intent on whitewashing evil. Not necessarily something we want to supinely accept.