 |
| How Loki wrought mischief in Asgard. Beware Surah 5:32, Loki! |
Letter to South China Morning Post this morning, by Walter Puccetti under the headline above.
He makes some good points, but gives it all away in the final paragraph by quoting the Koran, 5:32 which he says “equates the taking of one innocent life with the killing all of humanity”.
This plays into the hands of the apologists who claim that Islam is a “Religion of Peace”, which has been “hijacked” by an “extremely small minority” who “misunderstand” the peaceful nature of Islam.
However, if you look at the full text of the verse (Surah) quoted, you can see that there are two loopholes you – let alone Al-Qaeda and other Jihadis – could drive a truck full of bombs through:
[5:32] We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
Other translations of “spreading mischief in the land”:
or corruption in the earth (Picktall)
or for creating disorder in the land (Sher Ali)
or horrendous crimes (Khalifa)
or other villainy in the land (Dawood)
So, two things to note here:
1. Allah was referring to an instruction he gave to the Jews , the “Children of Israel”, (not to Muslims), an instruction he makes clear they disobeyed – “many of them continued to commit excesses in the land”.
2. To the extent that Muslims take this Surah to apply to them, there’s an exception to the prohibition of killing: if there is “mischief” or “disorder” or “corruption” or “villainy” in the land. Orthodox Muslims take this to mean anywhere that Islam and Sharia is not practiced as the dominant religion (ideology). That is, killing is allowable, by this Surah, against the West, because there is indeed “corruption, disorder, villainy or mischief” in the West, by definition, for it is part of Dar Al-Harb (lands of war) not Dar Al-Islam (lands where Islam is dominant).
Puccetti’s letter follows:
“Why West is wary of Islam”
I would like to respond to the article by Omar Ashour ("Better to capture than kill terrorist leaders", May 9). [copied below]
It is high time that Muslim intellectuals and opinion shapers stopped running with the foxes and hunting with the hounds, but stated clearly and categorically where they stand. Mr Ashour quoted a Facebook group which said that Osama bin Laden "lived a hero, he died a martyr ... if they killed one Osama, a thousand others will be born ... We are all Osama bin Laden".
The egregious bin Laden was a blood-stained mass murderer of Jews, Christians, Muslims and other people of all colours, races, nationalities and religions. Murder is murder even if committed by a would-be caliph of the faithful.
Unless Muslims accept and act on that realisation, they cannot expect the West to respond to them in anything other than a wary and guarded way. The Catholic Church in Northern and southern Ireland had the same problem with the Irish Republican Army. However, it stated unequivocally that the bloody IRA terrorists did not represent Catholics. There must be, equally, no equivocation in the response to Islamist terrorism on the part of Muslims.
No God worth that name would want to be worshipped with the blood of innocents; no true religion demands the slaughter of its enemies; and, actually, in the Holy Koran itself, God [Allah] equates the taking of one innocent life with the killing all of humanity (Koran 5:32).
Walter Puccetti, Tin Shui Wai
Omar Ashour’s article:
Omar Ashour
Updated on May 09, 2011
Better to capture than kill terrorist leaders
"He lived a hero, he died a martyr ... if they killed one Osama, a thousand others will be born," a comment says on a Facebook group called "We are all Osama bin Laden". The group was formed one hour after US President Barack Obama's announcement of the al-Qaeda leader's death. That Facebook group already has around 30,000 "likes". Moreover, there are more than 50 similar groups on Facebook.
Reaction to bin Laden's death on al-Jazeera and other Arabic news outlets has been mixed. Some view the man considered a mass murderer in the West as an icon, and his death and burial at sea at the hands of American forces will not undermine that perception in the eyes of his sympathisers.
Aside from the mixed signals in the virtual world, the critical question is whether eliminating bin Laden marks the beginning of al-Qaeda's demise in reality. Some terrorist organisations have, of course, collapsed following the death of their charismatic leader.
But capturing and trying violent leaders is probably a better marker of the end of such organisations - the chances of such an outcome being higher when such leaders recant their views and call on their followers to lay down their arms. Abimael Guzman, the leader of the Maoist Shining Path in Peru, and Abdullah Ocalan, the leader of the Kurdistan Workers' Party in Turkey, are notable examples of this.
By contrast, far from causing the demise of an armed movement, the killing of a charismatic leader at the hands of his enemies can transform such a figure into a martyr. Che Guevara was far more valuable to leftist militancy after his death than he was while alive.
Armed Islamism has its particularities, of course, but it also shares important characteristics with some of these groups, including the relationship between the physical elimination of a leader and organisational survival. Decentralised organisations with relevant ideologies usually survive leadership losses, whereas hierarchical, cult-like organisations often do not.
Since the September 11 attacks, al-Qaeda has been far from a hierarchical, cult-like organisation. Like guerilla movements of yore, al-Qaeda partakes of "ideological front" tactics: small urban cells and/or vulnerable individuals subscribe to the ideology and self-recruit or self-start an affiliated cell.
In all of its decentralised modes of operation, bin Laden mainly played the role of inspirational guide and iconic figurehead - a role better played when dead by American guns than alive, hiding from them.
Eliminating the "spiritual guide" (as opposed to the organisational leaders) of a militant group might be perceived as a political victory for a government in the short term, but it probably makes a comprehensive de-radicalisation process less likely, and it will not necessarily mean the end of the organisation in question. For long-term results, capture is almost always more effective than killing.
Omar Ashour is lecturer in politics and director of the Middle East Studies Programme at the Institute of Arab for Human Sciences and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter, Britain. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute
