post 1968 world - artsrn.ualberta.ca

Post 1968 World

Islam, the Middle East and the West: ‘Clash of Civilizations’?

‘Clash of Civilizations?’*

[*see “Clash of Civilizations?”, Resources – theory

developed by conservative Political Analyst and Professor

of Government, Samuel P. Huntington]

‘Clash of Civilizations?’

Video

Deeyah Khan: “Jihad – A British Story”

[interview with Norwegian Film Maker about 2015 release ]*

*excerpt; see full interview in ‘Add’l Readings.


Huntington vs Khan:

-Huntington suggesting that today’s global conflicts are more about culture than politics, about civilizations than nations

-In context of 21st century ‘culture’ and ‘civilization’ has come to be synonymous with ‘Western’ and ‘Eastern’, with the West characterized by Capitalism, Christianity and Judaisim and the East with state-directed economies of various ‘slants’ but most importantly, with Islam


Earlier focus on ‘isms’ (Capitalism, Liberalism, Socialism, Marxism, Maoism, Stalinism, Communism etc.) defining nation states given way to cultures and civilizations ‘without borders’

- “fault lines” drawn by differences between civilizations which in turn will determine when and where battles will be fought


Khan arguing that there is nothing ‘really new’ in today’s jihads or in todays jihadists (those willing to die for their cause)

- She sees origins of todays ‘extremist’ groups in politics of late 20th century: treatment of Muslims, discrimination, racism

- Likens Muslim Fundamentalism to Rightwing Racism [see article, Add’l Rdgs]


Those who go to war for Islam believe they are fighting for a just cause, an ideal ‘perfect’ society in which inequities (like racism) do not exist

- In this sense no different from those who went – and still do go – to war for their beliefs in principles like democracy and freedom

- (also not unlike those in so many countries, so many moments in time – my interpretation): seeking purpose and trying to make meaningful contribution


Khan argues that what has changed is the method: from conventional ‘war’ to terrorism

- However: arguable that terrorism was part of urban warfare, guerilla warfare long before

- And how are suicide bombers different from Japanese Kamakaze (for example)?

- Worth thinking about critically


Main point here:

Huntington and Khan represent two ‘opposite’ ways of framing and understanding this topic of ‘Islam, Middle East and the West’

-As we look briefly at several case studies, we need to keep these viewpoints in mind: while my approach (which reflects that of your textbook to a large extent) will be clear – the decision as to how YOU want to understand this global situation is YOURS!


Case Studies:

- tie into each other but also into histories we have looked at since Colonialism – including the Cold War and its battle of ideologies, and Decolonisation and its challenges

- Each illustrates how the ‘local’ issues (initially political even if defined in ethnic and/or religious terms) become ‘global’ – and reflect the Huntington—Khan debate


Case Studies:

- Northern Nigeria: contemporary ‘home’ of Boko Haram

- Iranian Revolution/Iraq: sunni/shi’ite Islam

- Israel/Palestine: intifada

- Afghanistan: the Taliban

- Al-Qaeda: global networking – “9/11” (2001)

Northern Nigeria: Boko Haram

Issues in Northern Nigeria stem from:

-Colonial legacy economic, legal development: north was Muslim – underwent its own jihads in 19th century

-Islamic rulers, law, education respected BUT only with respect to ‘local’, family issues: controversies, resistance throughout colonial era

-Economic development: favoured south (agriculatural commodities)


Nigeria: according to wealth distribution (early 2000s)

Note disparity between North and

South

N o r t h e r n P r o v i n c e s


Independence: discovery/exploitation of offshore oil

- central Federation sought to control: led to secession of southern province (where oil located) -Biafran war: international involvement (US, British oil interests involved)

- Significant because it openly pitted north against south: north Muslim, less well developed – little colonial investment


NORTHERN PROVINCES


Irony: problems of poverty ‘economic lack of development’, inferior education, infrastructure etc. tied to earlier colonial policy about ‘respecting culture (Islamic) of North’ --

But major issue of controversy following independence: degree to which north should have right to Sharia Law, Islamic education

- Everytime Constitution revisited, government overthrown/replaced (it was very unstable): first issue on the table was ‘Islam and the North’


As Federal Government (often in hands of Muslim President) continued to insist on ‘one country, one constitution, one law …’ – frustrations of North exacerbated

-And economy did not improve


2000: most of northern states adopted Sharia Law


2000 - 2010

- Muslim-Christian violence escalated, exacerbated ethnic conflict (ethnic groups tending to also be of one faith or the other)

- 1000s killed in brutal violence across the North 2000-2010: government unable (some say unwilling) to control

- Immediately spread into ‘Middle Zone’


Central Plateau, Jos: 2008


Central Plateau Region,

Jos c.2010


“Boko Haram” emerged in North (Maiduguri) in 2009 : in local language ‘Western Education is Sacrilege’


-wanted to spread Islamic law across not only north but whole of country

- Government attacks, leader killed: moved underground

- Adopted ‘terrorist’ tactics: bombings not only in north but elsewhere, including capital city

- Escalated attacks 2010-2012


2010: al-Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)

- al-Qaeda network produced AQIM: active in West Africa

- announced ‘support’ for Boko Haram: training, weapons

- Tactics different: Boko Haram focussed on domestic targets, AQIM funded itself with kidnappings/ransoming of foreigners (Mali, Mauritania, Niger)

-more than two dozen in last decade: included Canadian diplomat Robert Fowler (Niger 2011)


Boko Haram c. 2012 – with al-Qaeda support


Significant Development: Spring/Summer 2012

- Tuareg Independence Movement in Northern Mali

became ‘centre’ Islamist activity

- ‘secular’ movement allied with two ‘Islamist’ groups

(not a choice, latter better armed

-‘Ansar al-Dine’ and ‘Movement of Unity for Jihad in

West Africa (MUJWA –also MOJWA, ‘oneness’)

- affiliated with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb


Areas of Connected Islamist Activity, August 2012


MOJWA: committed to creation of Islamic State in all of Malian state – Ansar al-Dine: wanted Islamic State in North

- Initial alliance with ‘nationalists’ short-lived: secular interests could ‘negotiate’ with Malian government, Islamic ones could not

- French invaded: ‘chased al-Qaeda into the desert’ – but not out of Mali


Problems in Mali continue: no longer confined to North

- March 2015: machine-gun, grenade attack on popular bar-restaurant central Bamako (Capital) – 5 killed

- November 2015: 170 taken hostage in international Hotel, Bamako – 30 killed; French, US forces required to deal with attack

- Boko Haram, MOJWA, Ansar al-Dine ‘home grown’: al-Qaeda able to take advantage of local political issues, offer support, military assistance – escalates into jihad

Iran-Iraq: revolution and war

1953: Post-War, Cold War, Decolonization - ‘nationalist’ move by Iran’s prime-minister (preceded Nasser): tried to take over British-owned but ‘Anglo-Iranian’ Oil Company [ultimate outcome of WWI British Interests in region]

- Forced Shah (western supported) out of country - Another example of post-war US ‘involvement’ in formerly colonized world: CIA provoked coup using local military re-installed western-friendly Shah


Mohammed Mosadeqq

Overthrown by CIA

and local military 1953

Reza Shah (left) and Military General

who worked with CIA to return

Shah to power


Story similar to elsewhere (e.g. Ghana, Egypt): set out to modernize but in order to undermine ‘traditional’ and in this case Religious local power – government increasingly authoritarian, corrupt

-provoked resistance: articulated in terms of Islam - ‘authoritarian, corrupt rule is by Western-leaning puppet who disrespects Traditional Muslim clerics, laws, values…’: therefore installing a conservative Islamic regime is the best way to counter this influence


Iranian Revolution of 1979: Ayatollah Khomeini

-‘fundamentalist’ deposed Shah and “tried to build their vision of a true Islamic State”

-Hugely important moment: first truly Islamic (as distinct from Arab, nationalist) revolution

-Commitment to apply strict Islamic values, principles, law into Iranian life that had been corrupted, degraded, disrespected by Western secular values (embodied in Shah)


Ayatolla Khomeini:

- sent into exile in

France (with son)

by Shah

Returning 1979

(below);

welcomed by

supporters (right)


Revolution frightening to region but especially Iraq:

-Second ‘issue’: there is not one but two powerful ‘brotherhoods’ popular in whole Middle East/Africa/India – Sunni and Shia Islam [see map Textbook p. 1001]

-Iran (formerly ‘Persia) was Shia, Iraq (formerly part of Ottoman Empire) was Sunni

-While Shi’ites vast majority in Iran, Sunnis dominant elsewhere


Significance of Revolution:

-A political achievement -- ‘Revolution’ -- gave unprecedented power, influence to a religious movement

-A political power – Iraq – representing an opposing religious movement, launched war 1980

-Eight-year Iran-Iraq war ended in 1988: technically an Iranian victory but cost both countries enormously in men and money


Fall-out from War: Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait

-attempt to control rich oil fields to help economy destroyed by war

-Drew in UN forces united with Arab forces (from region):

“Desert Storm” was unexpectedly short – but had longer-term consequences in terms of Iraq – ‘West’ relations [see Textbook p. 1000]

Israel-Palestine: the intifada

Yom Kippur War: 1973 reignited international involvement in region - war was Israel’s successful effort to regain territory with respect to Arab Neighbours

-Created complicated conflict throughout region involving Egypt, Syria, Palestine – against Israel

-Catalyst: Hezbollah – militia formed in Lebanon


“Party of God”: took ‘religious’ stand as political entity


Hezbollah:

- Condemned Israel's actions in Lebanon

- But also challenged local PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization led by Yassar Arafat)

- Unlike PLO who are working with Israel and UN: Hezbollah declared that nothing but the complete destruction of the Israeli state can resolve the problems of the Palestinians (those still living in Exile as well as living and/or working in Israel)


1987: younger generation launched intifada (First)

- ‘prolonged campaign of civil disobedience against Israeli soldiers’ [textbook 998-9]

- significance: influence of Islamic Fundamentalism -- whereas earlier resistance was largely secular, political (i.e. PLO), these youths were fighting a jihad by whatever means they had


Second intifada:

- Concerns by both political parties (in Israel and Palestine) about the escalating violence led to 1993 accord

- Compromise in every sense: divided both Israel and PLO into more extremist groups

- Crucial provocation was deliberate new Jewish settlements in West Bank

- 2000: failed attempts to resolve led to ‘second intifada’

Second Intifada


‘Building of the Wall’:

- Inability of either party to control violence led to “the Wall”

- Literally built around the West Bank to control movement in and out [p. 998; see photo on p. 999 with Che Guevera image – also below]

Israel-Palestine: the Wall


Death of Yassar Arafat 2004: turning point

-2006 new political party defeated PLO winning majority of parliamentary seats

- Hamas: defined itself as ‘Sunni Muslim’ party in contrast to secular PLO

- Won ‘hearts and minds’ of Palestinians through welfare programmes: provided health care/centres, housing, education


Hamas regarded by Israel and the West as ‘terrorist organization’:

-US, European Union suspended aid to West Band, Gaza

-Living conditions for people deteriorated rapidly

-Impact: nurtured conditions for continued popularity of Hamas

Afghanistan

Story of Afghanistan returns us to Soviet Union and the Cold War:

- Part of new Russian Imperialism: invasion of Afghanistan [see Lecture on “ending the Cold War”]

-1979-1989: almost ten-year war in which at least 1 million civilians, 90,000 Mujahideen fighters, 18,000 Afghan troops and 14,500 Soviet soldiers were killed

- hugely costly for Soviet Union: Gorbachev withdrew as part of changing foreign policy 1989

Afghanistan

Story of Afghanistan returns us to Soviet Union and the Cold War:

- Mujahedeen: fighters defining themselves as Muslim – war was form of jihad against ‘infidel’ Soviets

- Islam was basis of nationalism for them – but not for all Afghans

- US saw only military that could be armed to defeat Soviet Union: poured arms and training into Afghanistan

Afghanistan

Mujahedeen Afghanistan (1987)

Afghanistan

Civil War and Rise of Taliban: - withdrawal of Russia left political void, divided interests between many groups: central dichotomy between those who saw Afghanistan in purely nationalist terms and those who defined nationalism in terms of Islam

-Latter hugely strengthened by years of war

- 1996 political party emerged rooted in strong, conservative Islam: Taliban

Afghanistan

- Taliban rule: reflects point Khan makes about creating image of ‘proper, perfect society’ based on religion

-Sought to build this new Islamic society on strict basis of sharia law – restrictive gender roles key

-‘oppression’ women (purdah, burka, no education etc) attracted international attention: locally had fairly widespread acceptance after decade of war, becoming ‘pawns’ in US-Soviet Superpower battle

-became base for another Islamic movement: al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda

Story returns us to legacies of Partition of India: creation of Muslim Pakistan - Pakistan bordered Afghanistan: affected by 1979-89 war

-Government initially turned to US for support, later turned against: US unwilling to allow Pakistan to join group of ‘nuclear powers

-Fueled more radical of Muslim groups: anti-US, anti-West, opposed to government co-operation

Afgahan-Soviet War

-

Al-Qaeda

Rise of Al-Qaeda: - much of war fought from bases inside Pakistan: hit-and-run raids into Afghanistan from north-west of country [see

Map, above]

-Mujahedeen were not only Afghans: Arabs from elsewhere in Muslim world joined in war, camps in Pakistan in 1980s

-One of these was son of billionaire Saudi businessman, Osama bin Laden

Al-Qaeda

Osama bin Laden in Afghan-Soviet War 1980s

Al-Qaeda

Osama bin Laden: - used family connections to funnel arms from Arab world into war: at this point – fighting on same side as US

-Some say bin Laden trained by CIA

-When Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan ‘Arab Afghans’ sought new battles: organized as ‘al-Qaeda’ (‘the base’)

-Shifted base to Sudan early 1990s: continued to train and recruit

Afghan-Soviet War: withdrawal

Al-Qaeda

Return to Afghanistan: - with rise of Taliban, 1996 victory in Afghanistan: al-Qaeda returned

-Established headquarters, several training camps: worked with Taliban

- 1990s: sponsored attacks on Western (mostly US) interests in Africa and Middle East

-Led up to September 9, 2001

Al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda

“9/11”: considered watershed in history

- co-coordinated attacks on US World Trade Centre (“the Twin Towers”), New York; Pentagon and White House in Washington (last failed, plane crashing in Pennsylvania)

-Almost 3000 people killed

See ‘Viewpoints’ (Textbook p. 1036): George W Bush, President of United States vs Osama bin Laden, claiming responsibility for attacks

Al-Qaeda

Taliban refused to ‘give up’ al-Qaeda leadership

-led to US invasion of Afghanistan 2001 (joined by NATO forces 2003)

Al-Qaeda

War in Afghanistan - ironic: US now at war against those it formally trained, armed and supported

-Ousted Taliban government quickly but entered into protracted war against them

-Continued to seek out al-Qaeda: operations moved back into mountains of Pakistan – and acts of terrorism increased [see textbook 1035]

Al-Qaeda

2011: killing of Osama bin Laden

-Was not until May 1, 2011 that bin Laden was finally killed by US Special Forces

-During intervening years (2001-2011): many reports of his death but his location in Pakistan, just outside of the capital Islamabad, confirmed Pakistan government had either been complicit or incredibly incompetent

-Worsened relations: death of bin Laden did not end al-Qaeda which has since generated network of resistance throughout Middle East and Africa

Al-Qaeda

January 14, 2015

post 1968 world - artsrn.ualberta.ca

Documents