map
Our Affiliates
Listen In 28 LanguagesRFE/RL Radio
In 28 Languages

'Berlin Wall's Lessons For Today'

In an op-ed for "USA Today," Jeffrey Gedmin discusses RFE and the role of free media in societies living under repressive regimes. More
More Articles

Commentary

Wahhabism-Khomeinism Is The Enemy Of Islam

A Wahhabist mosque in Baghdad

March 13, 2009
By M. D. Nalapat
Over the past three centuries, the world has witnessed the rise of a new faith, Wahhabism, which sought from the start to cloak itself in the mantle of Islam, a religion that had established itself across the world during the previous millennium. Converts to Wahhabism have destroyed sites relating to the heroes of the early years of Islam and have sought to extinguish the culture of tolerance and knowledge that gave the world so many intellectual riches.

Since the rise of Wahhabism, there has been no increase in the number of Muslim-majority countries, with the exception of the newly created Pakistan, which already had a substantial Muslim population, and hence cannot be regarded as a genuine addition in the way -- for example -- the lands that today comprise Indonesia and Malaysia became Muslim.

Why is it the past few centuries have seen a steady decline in the relative standing of the Muslim world, when compared to the West? Because this is the era not of "landspace," but of "mindspace."
Why is it the past few centuries have seen a steady decline in the relative standing of the Muslim world, when compared to the West (which is largely Christian by tradition, but secular in outlook)? Because this is the era not of "landspace," but of "mindspace." Capturing territory is of little use unless combined with winning the minds and hearts of the populations of the territories targeted. The tools needed to win the mindspace war are very different from those needed to conquer more landspace. They do not inflict physical harm, but help humanity and charm the mind -- things like advances in medicine and other technologies that enhance the quality of life.

The rise of Europe in recent centuries owed its origin to the substantial contributions made by that continent to knowledge. It is instructive that the vast majority of significant discoveries in the frontiers of knowledge still originate in the Western world, although, of course, some result from the work of people tracing their roots back to Asia.

Shared Mindspace

Because of migration from other continents to Europe, Australia, and North America, Western civilization is increasingly anchored not in ethnicity but in a shared mindspace -- a phenomenon exemplified by the election of Barack Obama as the 44th president of the United States. A software engineer in Chennai, India, or a technician from Singapore would have internalized as much -- if not more -- of the core values that define Western civilization -- such as hard work, an inquiring mind, and an independent spirit -- as migrants from countries that have for decades been under personalized dictatorships, such as Romania, Albania, or Bulgaria.

This goes to prove the obvious -- that the virtues that propelled Western countries to positions of power during the past several centuries are not geographically specific but are universal in their applicability.

Mindspace is at the core of the struggle now taking place within the Muslim world. Over that period, many Muslim-majority countries fell under the sway of external powers (several for the first time) and even today remain far behind others in the spread of the knowledge economy. This is at least in part the consequence of the spread of Wahhabism within the Muslim community, especially since the 1980s, when worldwide funding for it increased substantially, making Wahhabism (and later Khomeinism) a profitable business for many.

Afghanistan has been portrayed by the Wahhabis as a great victory. They forget to mention that the success of the Afghan resistance to the 1979 Soviet invasion was largely due to money, training, and weapons provided by the West and the involvement of moderate Afghans who provided information and helped the resistance fighters in many ways. Unfortunately, once Soviet troops left Afghanistan, the Wahhabis soon began killing others, thereby ensuring -- with a lot of help from outside -- their rise to power in 1996.

The Wahhabi Taliban are a group of fanatics who have nothing in common with the age-old Muslim ethos of peace and tolerance or with the ancient Pashtun tradition of chivalry and hospitality.

Why are Wahhabism and Khomeinism ideological twins? Because Khomeinism shares with Wahhabism the same intolerance for knowledge that Abdal Wahhab had and the same hatred of all those who refuse to bow before the Wahabbist-Khomeinists. Encouraged by the advent to power in Iran in 1979 of Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Wahhabists in other Middle Eastern countries increased the volume of their rhetoric and began demanding monetary tribute as the price for their support for some ruling elites in the region.

Losing Ground

Since the 1980s, these twin philosophies, especially Wahhabism, have been spreading across the globe, bankrolled by tens of billions of dollars that have made important Wahhabi and Khomeinist preachers multimillionaires. Several religious structures and institutions have come under their control and hundreds of millions of Muslims today have no education except that taught in schools that have as their basis the philosophy of Wahhab and Khomeini. No surprise that science, technology, literature, and culture have steadily lost ground in regions dominated by these fanatics.

Unless each country takes vigorous steps to free itself from this twin scourge, the future will remain bleak. Young Muslims of both sexes have the right to a modern education that gives them the knowledge needed to succeed in the global market. Sadly, many countries still deprive the majority of their young people of this opportunity. In many countries, the poor are condemned to a dismal future solely by the refusal of their governments to provide comprehensive education. To argue that such training may dilute adherence to the faith is an untruth designed to keep people in a state of ignorance, the better to exploit them.

The compassion and tolerance that form the core of Islam can eradicate the hatred and intolerance preached by the Wahhabis and the Khomeinists.

Who can forget that the Prophet Mohammad himself preferred conciliation to conflict, dialogue to violence? Only some 500 people (half of them Muslims) were killed in the battles that he fought, which together totaled only about 20 hours. His immense successes came not only from the sword but from the heart and the mind, the two qualities ignored by the Wahhabists and the Khomeinists that need to be honored today in a world where all humanity needs to work together to battle such common enemies as climate change, gender discrimination, poverty, and disease.

M.D. Nalapat holds the UNESCO Peace Chair at Manipal University, India. The views expressed in this commentary are his own, and do not necessarily reflect those of RFE/RL
This forum has been closed.
     
Comments
by: Abdulmajid
March 17, 2009 00:23
Dear Mr.Bright, even if I don't usually agree with atheism (but I don't think it is up to me to condemn anybody for that) here you're very right. And teh Taliban showed their barbarism no better tan with the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan.
But it would not do to try and force change onto the Arab society from outside. The French have trid it in North Africa and created only massive resentment. The US intervention in Iraq has proved disastrous. They said they have to win the hearts and minds of the people, but they did exactly the contrary.
Change in the Muslim society can only come from within, and for that, education is a must. Also education of women.
And human rights do not, in my mind, contradict Islamic values.
Anybody mayn say that the Holy Qur'an is full of aggression and even Antisemitism. However, the Torah is also full of aggression and racism, and as history shows the Christians have always mostly acted 180° oppositre to what they preach. As for Atheism, well the Communists propagated it, didn't they? And was Communism not the scourge of the 20th century? Even the Buddhists are not all pacifists (in the case of the Tibetans, their peaceful resistance may have gained them the sympathies of the world, but on the ground it has not availed them much.) SO I prefer that Islam includes the God-given right to self-defense. Now to qualify Al Qaida's and the Taliban's actionas as such would be downright criminal. No, I don't elieve in Wahhabism, and I don't believe in Khomeini's brand of "Islamic Bolshevism": Fortunately it has not gained many followers outside Iran. If this is so because it is a movement of Shi'ism (which the Sunnites abhor) or of Iranian nationalism ( which the Arabs reject) or both, is really not important. But that some portray the "Green danger" and Iran as teh new Soviet Union is also unfair and downright false. There is no such thing as an Islamic block.
I doubt that Mankind will ever learn to live in pewace. But to portray all of Islam as teh enemy of Mankind is outright evil.
Of course the Saudi Wahhabis are hypocrites: They live an excessive, decadent lifestyle which contradicts their own propounded values, and to make up for their bad conscinece they support the extremosts abroad. Also to keep them from doing any mischief at home.
Yet, if people in the Muslim world could have access to education, to live in dignity and not in absolute misery and to have a perspective in life it would take the wind out of the sails of extremists and trerrorists, and nobody in his right mind would support them any longer.

by: Martin Bright
March 16, 2009 15:19
AS an atheist I cannot say one religion is beter or worse than another. And I respect ohter people´s beliefs. On the other hand, one cannot but concur with the article´s writer: wahhabism have left no enlightened societies, but barbarism.
And we in the west are part of it. Our governments finance and propagandize in the muslim world the wahhbi ideas in order to counter communist ones. And our governments trained them in the use of weapons and bombs, allegedly against the communists in Afghanistan, but in the end those same weapons and bombs were directed againts us. 11/9, Madrid and London bombings NEVER, ever would have happened if our governments ever supply, finance, and promote wahhabi fundamentalism as an atisoviet-anticommie weapon.
RFE/RL must have an eddition directed against the arab dictatorial-theocratic governments, if one have to believe it is not an american propaganda machine.

by: Abdulmajid
March 15, 2009 11:36
Islam is no more or no less inhgerently evil than all other religions. And cruelty is a human constant through history and has been so since Cain slew Abel, and will continue to be. The ancient cultures of the Romans, teh Aztecs , the Incas are so admired yet see what cruelty was there among these peoples towards the nations they conquered. So why always protray the Muslims and Islam as especially agressive and inhuman? By doing that you prove to be as bigot and hateful as Radovan Karadzic, one of the most despicable figures in human hisatory and right up there with Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic Islam Karimov and Kim Il Sung.

by: Abdulmajid from: Hannover
March 15, 2009 11:18
wleysnakeskins, you certainly ARE an Islamophobe! What do you want to say with all those quotes? That Islam is inherently inhuman?? By that you justify the genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina!
But even iof you were right: what about the Reconquista in Spain? The Crusades? The colonial occupation of North Africa by France, Britain, Italy and Spain? The Palestinian conflict? Kashmir? East Turkestan? Chechnya? Here, the Muslims are the VICTIM, not the aggressor, the aggressors are all non-Muslims! You bigot Islamophober, are you a "Serb" perchance? But idiocy and evil is not limited to Serbs alone: I have as much hatwe and contempt for the "Stone-age" Islamists the Taliban as everybody else, they are Afghanistan's Khmewr Rouge, and if you look at the Old Testament you will find as much justification for violencve and aqggression as in most all other religions? Or what about how the Spaniards first and then the British brought the message of Christ "love each other as you love yourselves" to the Ame3ricas, and erased the Native American cultures off the map? And teh Incas, teh Aztecs, the tribes of North America, werte they so peaceful? The Japanese, being Buddhist, weren't they brutal to each other and to other peoples as well? Islam is no more and no less aggressive than other religions, and most of the Muslims aren't either: and the way they behave to each other or within their families or their nations is certainly none of your business. I'm proud of being a Muslim and I do not mistreat my wife or daughter nor do I want to convert all people to Islam but I certainly want to live the lifestyle I choose where I choose to and the way I choose to, and be accorded the same respect from non_muslims and from everybody else which they expect for themselves, and I would only call those Kafirs who refuse me this respect, and as long as I don't step on some other's feet I have all the right in the world to do so, and so do all other Muslims, and if you don't want to concede us that, if you want my enmity you can have it!

by: Abdulmajid
March 14, 2009 18:35
To "wleysnakeskins":
So you say Islam and all Muslims are the enemy of mankind and should be subdued and put down. With that you justify the massacre of Srebrenica and similar such things. According to you, Milosevic should be rehabilitated, Karadzic must be set free and Mladic should be given all and any decorations the West has to offer. And every man, woman and child who happens to belong to the faith of Islam is fair game who can be killed, robbed and expelled.
And as for Christianity being the religion of love and universal broitherhood, what about slavery? What about the conquest and colonization of the Americas, and the destruction of the Native American peoples and societies? What about the Crusades? There you don't have anything to say?
I don't have to apologize to NO ONE for belonging to the Muslim faith!
Peoples of ALL FAITHS and ALL NATIONALITIES have always done horribly cruel and horrendous things to each other al the time. Was Pizarro an Islamist fighter? Or Hitler? Or Stalin? Or the Khmer Rouge? Or the Aztecs? Or the Incas? Or the Maya? Or the Romans? The Visigoths and Ostrogoths? The LTTE? The Red Chinese during their "peaceful liberation" of Tibet? Napoleon's soldiers in Spain? And then, in the 19th and 20th century: was it the Algerians, the Moroccans or the Libyans who attacked and colonized France, Spain and Italy or was it the other way round? And the Muslim peoples in the Caucasus and Central Asia, didn't they have the right to defend themselves from Russian imperialism and colonialism? Or are they just "bandits" (A honorific the Russians to this day apply to the Chechens). What about the Palestinians? Don't they have a right to exist in their own homeland? Had the Crusaders a right to kill and expel them back then? What about the RSS in India? SO they have a right to slaughter Muslims? I won't deny the Holy Qur'an says so nor the Hadith: But don't the actions of the Chetniks in Bosnia-Herzegovina prove them right: To my eye they do. The "Serbs" tried to exterminate the Bosniaks solely on the ground that their ancestors had, 500 years ago, embraced Islam.
I will look up in the Qur'an and Hadith whether you have quoted them right. And to conflate these with the statements of today's Islamist leaders-...what do you want? To christianize the Muslims? And let me tell you why the Bosniaks and Kosovars wanted independence from Milosevic's Serbo-Slavia: Because Slobo's "government of the Serb people, for the Serb people and by the Serb people" was Hell on Earth for them.
So you say all Muslims are evil because Islam in its nature is aggressive and evil.
Then I despise you for that.

by: wleysnakeskins from: Phoenix, AZ
March 14, 2009 08:34
Quotes from the Koran:
--The unbelievers are your inveterate enemy. (4:101)
-- Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve. (8.55)
-- Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (48:29).
-- It is unlawful for a believer to kill another believer, accidents excepted. (4:92)
-- Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. (5:51)
-- Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme. (8:40)
-- Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. (2:193)
-- The true believers fight for the cause of God, but the infidels fight for the devil. (4:76)
-- We will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. (3:151)
-- I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers. (8:12)
Quotes from the sayings of mohammed:
Muhammad said to the Jews: "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. “
Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

Mohammed said, "I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.." (otherwise it will not). Vol. 4:196
Mohammed said, "Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him." Vol. 9:57
Mohammed said, " No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir" (infidel). Vol. 9:50
Muhammad said:
Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, …(Sahih Muslim 4294)
YUSUF QARADAWI, the spiritual leader of the Muslim brotherhood and the most popular and influential Islamic religious authority in the world today, is on the recommended reading list of local mosques. Among other Islamist-supremacist things, he wrote:
“Islam came to be followed, not to follow; to be dominant, not subordinate."
“Islam came with its complete, comprehensive and eternal sharia (law) for the whole of mankind.”
ABUL MAUDUDI, the most important and popular Islamic writer of the 20th Century, wrote: “The goal of Islam is to rule the entire world and submit all of mankind to the faith of Islam. Any nation or power that gets in the way of that goal, Islam will fight and destroy.”
________________________________________
The statements about Islam above are from the most highly revered and respected Islamic sources, not from "Islamophobes"!

by: Altay from: Baku
March 14, 2009 06:35
In Azerbaijan in the 19th century secularly educated muslim intelligentsia managed to win the hearts and minds of the population. They also managed to make themselves the main leading stratum of the society by defeating the clergy intellectually even as representatives of Islam. (The same was during the Golden Age when Ibn Sina represented Islam not unknown cleric). The Result was glorious. Theathers, operas, secular female schools, more than 200 newspapers and eventually democratically elected parliament and government. Unfortunately Sovietization put an end to this proved to be very succesfull trend. After the collapse of the Soviets we have been witnessing an opposite trend when khomeinists and salafis are winning the hearts and minds of young azeris while the intelligentsia is completely incapable to resist. It is true that Azeri society is still overwhelmingly secular. But it is not the result of Soviet atheistic past but because of deeply rooted achievments of pre-revolutionary intelligentsia. The question is how to revive the capability of secular intelligentsia and to lead the societies to the future and not to the past?

by: Abdulmajid
March 13, 2009 22:00
It is interesting that during the 12th and 13th century in North Africa two movements developed whose ideological orientation can be described as integrist and fundamentalist. These were the Almoravids and supeseded by teh Almohads. These movements were started by preachers like Abdel Wahab: Ahmed ibn Yasin in the case of the Almoravids, and Mohamed Ibn Tumart in the case of the Almohads, who allied themselves with powerful chieftains (like Ibn Wahab did with Ibn Saud): Yusuf ibn Tashfin and Abd El Moumen respectively, to carry out their ideal conviction of Islam. but in the case of the Almoravids and Almohads, through the interventions in Al Andalus, they managed to create a new high in Arab-Andalusian culture, among it the most important monuments of that time, like the Giralda and aqueducts which were in use until the 1950s in Seville, the Kutubia in Marrakesh; and whose cultural impact influenced the kingdom of Granada and the subsequent dynasties in Morocco, with the continuation of a refined lifestyle first developed during the Emirate of Cordoba. And in this time lived philosophers like Maimonides or Ibn Rushd (even though they were persecuted by the rulers). It was a high time of Muslim civilization, because even though the rulers of the Almoravids and Almohads started as radical integrists and fundamentalists, in short time they turned to the promotion of art and science, and nobody will put in doubt that during that time lifestyle, art and architecture were at their highest development in Al Andalus. Sadly, it was all very short-timed, but its memory lasts until today. In contrast the Wahhabis (to which degree the Khomeinists too I can't say, but I once named their ideology "Shi'ite Muslim Bolshevism") have not developed a higher culture. On the contrary in Afghanistan they have shown themselves as outright barbarians and savages. Against the Hazara they even did a little ethnic cleansing of their own.
Any dictatorship is despicable.
But democracy and liberty must grow within a people, they cannot be imposed from the outside. It is a slow and laborious process, and it can only work if there is a certain degree of wealth among the populastion, and much more important, education. In this respect the Saudis and the other oil-rich countries have missed out great by keeping their womenfolk from public life (except in Kuwait) but things are slowly changing.
The potential is certainly there.
Of course sometimes I think that the doings of the Wahhabis and the Taliban must have our Prophet (p.b.u.h.) spinning in his grave
     
TEXT SIZE - +

Editors' Picks

President Van Rompuy

'How's That Again?!' Audio

Karzai Inauguration

The Anticipation Of Change Video

Follow Us On Twitter

Keep up-to-date on all the latest news from RFE/RL's broadcast region by following us on Twitter:
~ You can find our instant news feed at @RFE_RLNEWS.
~ An obsessive Kremlin watcher? Follow our blog at @PowerVertical.
~ Human rights abuses chronicled at @RightsWatchdog.
~ News, comment, and the odd silly dictator story at @TransmissionRFE.

Products and services:

RSSMail SubscriptionMobile