|
The Corporation's Program
Violence,
Terrorism and Social Upheaval: What’s really going on in Muslim
countries?
“Once the institutions of sovereignty are destroyed in
any state, especially one with a heterogeneous society, the odds
are against any effort to build a stable alternative in the same
generation.” —Shibley Telhami, “The Return of
the State”
To
many Western eyes, much of the Muslim world seems on the brink of
chaos. Do we understand why? Can the situation be stabilized? Do
some in the Arab world share our perceptions? How do those with
opposing views see the current state of affairs in Islamic societies?
Such questions were tackled at a June 5th and 6th forum held at
Carnegie Corporation of New York that drew together distinguished
Carnegie Scholars and grantees working on issues related to Islam
and the modern world. Highlighting significant work on a cluster
of related themes, the colloquium’s rich conversation and
exchange of ideas (some of which are summarized below) not only
led to new insights, but indicated likely areas of future study
as well.
Shibley
Telhami, Sadat Chair for Peace and Development, University of Maryland,
opened the session with a report on the results of a series of public
opinion polls he has conducted over several years in six Arab countries:
Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates.
Intense frustration with the existing political order was highly
evident in 2004, Telhami found, leading a plurality of respondents
to identify themselves primarily as “Muslim” or “Arab”
rather than as citizens of specific countries. Recently, however,
opinions have shifted in a trend Telhami calls “the return
of the state.” Due largely to developments in Iraq, a markedly
greater number of Arabs have adopted a statist view of the world.
Despite continued frustrations with local governments, Telhami argues,
fear of anarchy has made pan-Islamic movements less popular while
generating more favorable feelings toward the state.
Arguably,
nowhere is the issue of identity more pressing than in Iran, according
to Shireen Hunter, visiting scholar at the Center for Muslim-Christian
Understanding, Georgetown University. There is an upsurge of Iranian
nationalism, she notes, and a schism in regard to what the relationship
should be between Islam and the state. Sectarianism in general is
a problem, she added, and if sectarian identities become more widely
accepted throughout the Muslim world, this could create a large
swath of trouble from Azerbaijan to Turkey. Sectarianism is the
worry of the moment, agreed Rachel Bronson, Senior Fellow and Director,
Middle East Studies, Council on Foreign Relations. Is this growing
problem a challenge to the state, she questioned, a result of state
collapse or an instrument of the state itself?
Laura
Donohue, Visiting Fellow, Stanford University Center for International
Security and Cooperation, wondered what type of state people want.
She pointed out the double deficit that exists in countries with
little regard for the rights on which democracies are built: life,
liberty and property rights are consistently violated, and the state
fails to provide for people at the same time. Steering the discussion
toward the issue of violence, Donald Horowitz, James B. Duke Professor
of Law and Political Science, Duke University, defined violent behavior
as not being a single phenomenon, but a method in which determinants
may differ. Collective violence is the prerogative of young men,
he stressed. Young men need a pack leader, added Darius Rejali,
Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Reed College.
Rejali studies violence, particularly the role of torture, in modern
life. His research on Iran has demonstrated that the use of torture
tends to rise during periods of stability. More must be understood
about factors affecting the demand for and diffusion of torture
methods, as well as our ability to monitor this form of violence,
he believes; and he agrees, this is an understudied topic in need
of qualitative, precise research.
Bernard
Haykel, Associate Professor, Department of Middle Eastern and Islamic
Studies, New York University, had just returned from conducting
extensive research in Saudi Arabia. He pointed out that violence,
jihad specifically, involves a very small percentage of the Muslim
population and therefore has no real statistical significance. The
9/11 terrorists, for example, were a few individuals united by collective
experience who were likely to have joined up because of a recruiter
network. Jihad is a “just war” theory, he pointed out,
which its proponents regard as a defensive strategy, regardless
of empirical evidence.
“It
has become essential for us to understand Islam as a religion, its
unity, diversity and culture, ” Carnegie Corporation president
Vartan Gregorian has written, “along with the roles of Muslim
nations, the challenges they face, and their future place in the
world. Of course, this is much easier said than done.” By
supporting the development and expansion of the study of Islam within
the United States, and creating opportunities for leading scholars
to discuss the contours of critical issues such as the underpinnings
of violence and terrorism, the Corporation aims to contribute to
public debate and policymaking in this vitally important area.
|