The End Of Days
By Anwaar Hussain

"The enlightened world citizenry needs to jolt itself into action before these lunatics on both sides decide to answer the call on one fateful night of full moon. Otherwise, the "End of Days" may not seem such a far-fetched idea."

SUICIDE ATTACKS have been on the rise around the world for about the last two decades. Since many such attacks, including those of 9/11, have been actually, or purportedly, committed by Muslims, it has been conveniently obvious that Islamic "fundamentalism" and "militancy" are the central causes.


Another expedient conclusion has been that these "fundamentalists" abhor Christianity in general and Western civilization, or it's so called way of life, in particular.Concurrently, as if on cue, the chant of the terms "Islamic fundamentalism" and "terrorism" by the Western media, the policy makers and many interested parties globally has been taken up at once.


This thoughtless overuse of these terms, in tandem with the current Western onslaught on Islam, therefore, necessitates a serious inquiry.


What is "fundamentalism" and what is the origin of the term? Are there fundamentalist elements in Islam? Can the whole religion be branded as radical if such elements do exist in Islam? When Western policy makers and their mouthpieces use the term in the context of Islam, are there ulterior motives? Who is primarily responsible for the beating Islam's image is taking? Are there any other fundamentalists active these days, or is it just the Muslim ones? As "terrorists" are invariably labeled "Islamic fundamentalists", let us first focus on the word "fundamentalism".


Ironically, the term "fundamentalism" is not Islamic in origin. It originated in a series of pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915. Entitled "The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth," these booklets were written by leading evangelical Christian churchmen in the face of a relentless surge of secularism overtaking the Western world. By and large, fundamentalism was a response to the loss of influence traditional revivalism experienced in America during the early years of the twentieth century.


Conversely, in the Muslim world, unlike the Christian world or its present secular _expression, there has never been a group or sect that called itself "fundamentalist".That fundamentalism, basically a Christian concept, never really died out, is witnessed by the spectacular resurgence of "neo-fundamentalists" in the corridors of power in the United States. The President of United States refers to the divine and invokes the name of God more often than any other incumbent Western head of state. His second inaugural address of 20th January 2005 bears the most recent testimony to this fact.If its designs are not sinister, the West must bear two things in mind before branding any religion as "militant" and its followers as "fundamentalists".

First every subject has certain fundamentals. Be it religion, business, science, or any other issue, the underlying fundamentals are necessary to be learned and practiced. Each of these subjects has certain distinguishing features. Such attributes may alternatively be called the fundamentals of these subjects.


Physics, for example, would be impossible to grasp without first tackling its fundamentals of Laws of Motion, theories of relativity and atomic particles.Likewise, all religions, such as Islam, have certain fundamentals. Even atheists, moralists, humanists, not followers of any religions really, follow certain fundamentals. Not following them means one cannot claim to be a true devotee of that ideology.


Logically then, fundamentalism is an approach, an attempt or a movement that holds onto or tries to uphold these fundamentals. Muslims, like followers of all other religions, believe in these as revered features and endeavor to conform to these as best as they can nothing more, nothing less and nothing extraordinary.


Second, a little lesson in history. What goes around comes around. When religion is mixed with politics for underhanded motives, a dangerous brew is the end concoction. If the Bin Ladens of today offer Paradise to the fresh recruits who die in a holy cause, Pope Urban II did exactly the same when enlisting soldiers for a crusade to "tear that land from the wicked race" in AD 1095.Slaughtering an infidel was advertised as a virtuous act ensuring profit and prestige, both here and in the hereafter, for those joining the Pope's army.


For this Christian "Jihad", the papal promise was complete "atonement" from all sins and guaranteed entry into heaven, not much different than the Bin Laden promise. The subsequent slaughter of women, children, Jews and Muslims has been described by various historians as having caused the streets of Jerusalem "to flow in blood up to the bridal reins".


Presently, the West castigates moderate Muslims for not openly condemning the acts of the Bin Laden ilk. Muslims may counter-argue that the citizenry of the greatest Western power, the USA, has actually elected for the second time the half mad neo-fundamentalists to run the most dominant Western government, handing them the reins of a most awesome military power while their hands were still bloody from ongoing murders of innocent human beings.


The Muslim fundamentalists, by and large, are fringe dwellers of Muslim society, nowhere close to the seat of power in any significant Muslim country--a fact even the Western world recognizes. To many Muslims, therefore, it increasingly sounds like a purposeful attempt to create a new rift in the already fragmented world of Islam.One could argue that Christianity has matured and its afore-quoted bloody manifestations are seen no more.


This is a debatable argument at best. Not very far back the Church was on a rampage in Europe and parts of the American continent. And currently, the present American neo-fundos, answering to imagined "divine calls", are straining at the leash to plunge the entire Muslim world in pools of their own blood. Given their unparalleled military superiority, many neocon mouths salivate at the mere mention of the word "Crusade". Unbelievable as it is, the insanity of this dangerous messianic strain of Christian fundamentalism is manifestly clear in its attempts to ally itself with Israel in preparation for the so-called "End of Days".


It is not too difficult to argue that this heightened concern in the West about the Muslim world suitably coincided with the demise in the mid 80's of the Soviet Union. For almost fifty years in the last century the socialist giant remained a favorite punching bag for the Western powers. The very Muslim "fundamentalists" of today were nurtured by the West and used as pawns for an accelerated downfall of the Soviet empire.


The West is crying foul now that the chickens have come home to roost. Almost all the so-called Muslim fundamentalist hot spots, e.g. Kashmir, Chechnya, Palestine etc., existed then as now. None were then thought worthy of the scorn now heaped upon them by the West. The reason is simple. With the socialist apparition out of the way, it was obvious that the Western world must have another demon to exorcise. If "Muslim fundamentalism" had not been conjured up soon enough, another evil empire would have been sought or invented. After all, the huge military muscle built up for the earlier adventure could not be allowed to lie idle and wither away for want of exercise. Moreover, power does not operate in a vacuum, needing a medium to exert itself in or risk fading away.


The fateful arrival, therefore, of the neocons upon the scene has only accelerated the inevitable.If in the process some genuine Muslim struggles had to be sacrificed at the altar of expediency, so be it. How else could the deliberate ignoring of the Muslims' genocide in Kashmir, Palestine and Chechnya, among many, at the hands of the highly trained and very well equipped state forces be justified while predominantly Christian East Timor got its independence for a song by comparison?


Why else is the plight of these Muslims only whispered about but never brought to public attention by the leaders of the Western media and public policy?


Why else was democracy and nationhood deemed good for the goose but not for the gander?


Why else were Muslim despots and dictators of every hue and color cultivated, pampered and propped up by the West? It is thus not very difficult to surmise that this deliberate use of the _expression "Islamic fundamentalism" by the West and their cronies is mischievous, willful and malicious.


It also explains to a great degree the Western tendency to lump together acts of extremism, sabotage or fanaticism on the part of some splinter groups in the Muslim world with movements of Islamic revival. That the attempt is both misleading and counter-productive obviously does not ruffle their feathers.


It is misleading because the origin, terminology and description of "fundamentalism" are borrowed primarily from the Christian fundamentalist movement of the American South.


It is counterproductive because ordinary Muslims, or Islam, have nothing to do with the acts of fanaticism carried out in the name of Islam. Bracketing ordinary Muslims with the fanatics will only swell the ranks of the very people giving sleepless nights to the West.


The theory peddled by reigning neocons that future 9/11s can be avoided only by an across-the-board transformation of Muslim societies is, thus, overly simplistic and ultimately dangerous. The presumed connection between suicide attacks and Islam and the subsequent bogies of "fundamentalism" and 'terrorism' are a transparent sham and deserve to be treated with unmitigated contempt. Pursuing this farce may give birth to self-serving domestic and foreign policies, like the Patriot Act and Iraq/Afghanistan invasion, but cannot stem the danger of suicide attacks.The fact is that a band of fringe lunatics does exist in Islam.


It cannot be overemphasized, nonetheless, that Islam itself has nothing to do with their acts. Desperate situations spawn desperate actions. Therefore, certain flag carriers of repressed Muslim peoples drawing attention to their plight cannot just be branded as terrorism.


Addressing their grievances, on the other hand, would go a long way in eliminating the danger.


One cannot but admit, however, that the primary responsibility for the misperception of Islam in the West and among other non-Muslims lies with none other than the debauched Muslim elites, past and present.


Voluntarily or otherwise, existing Muslim elites, with few exceptions, are entirely dependent on the West for their otherwise untenable claim to power. Unfortunately, the existing Western and the toady Muslim leadership acting in concert are dealing a more devastating blow to Islam's image than if one of them were to act alone.


Grotesquely fascinating is the fact that some of these fundamentalist packs on both sides argue that there is no such thing as peaceful co-existence. One must, eventually, vanquish and destroy the other in order to exist. Such insane reactionary forces give birth to equally insane counter-reactionary forces as indelible a fact as Newton's Third Law of Motion. The ensuing battle between these harebrained crazies is neither a Crusade nor a clash of civilizations. It is simply a clash of rabid fundamentalist dogmas.


In this clash of radical creeds, each camp will use whatever arms are available to it. These will either be state of the art weaponry, like Tomahawk Cruise Missiles, JDAMs, and Predator Drones etc., or, of necessity, the primitive weapon of plain old suicide attacks.


Either way, innocent human beings caught in the crossfire remain the chief losers.But even that is mild when compared to what may be in the offing. Talk of nuking Mecca to send one final message to the Muslim world has already done the rounds in the neocons' camp.


In turn, Muslim radicals too are desperately seeking the horrible nuclear weapon. The enlightened world citizenry needs to jolt itself into action before these lunatics on both sides decide to answer the call on one fateful night of full moon. Otherwise, the "End of Days" may not seem such a far-fetched idea.

Copyrighted : Anwaar Hussain

Contact Mr. Hussain at his web site: Fountainhead