What in the Name of God?
Religious Extremism, Fear & Terrorism

By James F. Mattil

Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Islamic Fundamentalism has become the subject of scrutiny, controversy and debate. On one hand, Islamic terrorists (Islamists) are perceived as a threat to world security - protagonists in a new holy war. Alternatively, we’re told that the vast millions of mainstream Muslims reject the views of extremists, while other reports suggest that popular support for Islamic Fundamentalism is far deeper than one might expect. And so we’re left in a quandary, asking why do they hate us?

Many experts and analysts refer to the rise of Islamist terrorism as a new phenomenon, more deadly and more obtuse than the more traditional terrorism associated with separatist and nationalist movements. Some refer to the Islamists as if they are some mysterious and incomprehensible mutation - suicidal fanatics who make no demands and take no credit for their acts of terror.

In fact, there are surprising similarities between Islamic, Christian and Jewish Fundamentalists. Religious fundamentalists often share some common traits and motivations with secular dissidents engaged in political violence. But perhaps the most disturbing situation is the convergence of fundamentalist interests and the potential for a global holy war, with ground zero being Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

The Power of Fear
Christian Fundamentalism
Jewish Fundamentalism
Muslim Fundamentalism
Summary

THE POWER OF FEAR

When Winston Churchill warned, “we have nothing to fear, but fear itself,” it’s doubtful he realized the sweeping political accuracy of those inspiring words.

The common thread that weaves violent political movements together is fear. It is not the only motivating factor behind political violence, nor necessarily the most obvious, but it is virtually always there. Whenever we ask why people hate, or why they are willing to kill or die for a cause, the answer is invariably fear.

Religious fundamentalists are united by fear. Whether they are Christian, Muslim, or Jew, fear is the common denominator. They fear change, modernization and loss of influence. They fear that the young will abandon the churches, mosques and synagogues for physical and material gratification. They fear the influence of mass media and its ability to subvert the young with song, dance, fashion, alcohol, drugs, sex and freedom. They especially fear education if it undermines the teachings of their religion. They fear a future they can’t control, or even comprehend.

These fears are as common among traditionalist Muslims as they are with traditionalist Jews and Christians. We’ve all heard similar concerns about moral decay, decadence, and the influence of the impious. These are the evils of which religious teaching warn us.

These fears resonate loudest among those people who have least. For people mired in poverty, lacking hope and education, frustrated by political and economic systems they can neither understand or control, religion holds meaning and offers hope, at least for future salvation, if not in this world.

Perhaps it’s not surprising to realize that it is fear that also connects the myriad of nationalist, separatist and independence movements who also engage in political violence. Although experts, academics and analysts hypothesize about a multitude of causal effects that lead to violence and terrorism, fear is an essential underlying motivator.

People are social beings who come together in groups with shared values, religion, culture, language, tradition, heritage, or location in a common hope for survival and prosperity. Whenever the core characteristic that bonds a group together comes under threat, the group will inevitably fear for its very survival. Naturally, they’ll attempt to change the situation that poses the threat, or, failing that, they will attempt to repel the threat and strengthen their group cohesiveness. Occasionally, leaders seek to exploit popular fears for personal advantage by exaggerating threats.

Examples are plentiful. In the Northern Ireland conflict both sides fear changes that will erode their nationality, language or culture and with it their economic opportunity. Each group fears the other will dominate them unjustly.

Similar motivations exist (with variations) in Sri Lanka, the Basque Country in Spain, Rwanda, Sudan, Jammu and Kashmir, Palestine and Israel, or among the Kurds of Turkey, Iraq and Iran. Many groups have survived attempted genocide against them, certainly the Jews, the Irish, but also Tutsis, Hutus, Kurds, Armenians, Azeris, and Arabs. This is not to suggest that numerous other factors don’t also influence the move to violence, but none act upon people with the urgency and motivational power of fear.

CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM

The key to Fundamentalist Christian belief is their acceptance of the inerrancy of the Bible. The scriptures, representing the word of God, provide a road map for the future.

One of the fundamental elements of evangelical Christianity is a belief that the Bible prophesies a second coming of Christ. There is some disagreement as to whether the second coming would be precipitated by mankind’s positive achievements, or by his failings. In either case, the “signs of the times” that fore tell the second coming are bad news – political anarchy, religious apostasy, increased wickedness, earthquakes, plagues and widespread misfortune.

The first anticipated event is the Rapture, wherein faithful Christian believers and followers would be “caught up together to meet the Lord in the air.” The rest of humanity will be left behind to endure the “tribulation,” a series of terrible calamities lasting for seven years, under direction of the “Antichrist.”

During the tribulation, the Antichrist would force people to wear “the mark of the beast,” and he will desecrate the “Temple” in Jerusalem. The Second Coming of Christ, the battle of Armageddon, and the tribulation are to be followed by the millennium and the Final Judgment.

Those who are redeemed will be granted eternal bliss, while the wicked will be condemned to eternal punishment. The Righteous, who will meet the Lord during the Rapture, will presumably avoid all this hellishness. The reason for their salvation and selection for the Rapture would be their unwavering adherence to the scriptures.

A dilemma arises in that there is no Temple in Jerusalem, so one must be reconstructed on the Temple Mount before it can be desecrated to fulfill the Bible prophecy and it is the Jews that must build it.

Thus Christian fundamentalists have found common ground with the Jews. Since their Christian fate and that of the entire world is at stake, the Christian Right is committed to supporting and protecting Israel at all costs. This relatively new and unusual alliance has important ramifications.

This entails support for the Israel’s hard liners, including leaders like Ariel Sharon and Binjamin Netanyahu. A substantial component of such support is US financial aid to Israel, together with political support, opposition to UN resolutions, or condoning Israeli actions. For many Americans this should be disquieting situation in that it involves compromising America’s political ideals, process and parties in the name of religion in another state.

The Christian Right began its political crusade in the 1950’s and gained momentum and influence in the late 1980’s and into the 1990’s. This “moral majority” has been dedicated to electing candidates that share their conservative religious values, as symbolized by a single issue – abortion rights. Until recently, such views were anathema to liberals, especially Jews. However, by linking the cause of the Christian Right to that of Jews, Christian leaders have broadened their political clout, while sapping traditional Jewish support from the Democratic Party.

Today, both republicans and democrats must be strongly pro-Israel to win election and republicans now compete by being stronger Israeli supporters than their democratic opponents. The result has been an escalation in support for Israel.

It’s not surprising that the current Bush Administration turned its back on the Middle East peace process. Although President Bush has paid lip service by announcing his vision for a Palestinian state, he made no efforts toward creating one. Meanwhile, former republican House Majority Leader, Rep. Dick Armey was been more forthcoming asserting his vision for a Palestinian state, somewhere in the Middle East, but definitely not in Palestine. His call for mass displacement and resettlement of the Palestinians was a shocking revelation of the depth to which Christian fundamentalism has penetrated leadership of the American government.

To most Americans, it should be frightening to realize the underlying beliefs of our elected officials and the ways that US policy is being distorted by religious convictions. In the absence of a formal US foreign policy since the end of the Cold War, such religious motivations and their proponents have had a free hand in shaping US responses, with little regard for the potential long-term consequences.

In the US, Christian fundamentalism has focused on the ballot box. Nonetheless Christian Fundamentalists also resort to violence. Religious extremists have attacked abortion clinics, doctors and patients in acts of terrorism. In Northern Ireland, Protestant extremists continue violent attacks against Catholics on the streets and in their homes. This form of terrorism rarely makes the world news but the assaults and fire bombings have an effect similar to the US serial sniper murders. In November 2002, members of a Protestant terrorist group actually crucified a Catholic man.

Meanwhile, some argue that the US invasion of Iraq was motivated primarily by desires to secure Israel and Israeli interest in the Mid-East region. Others contend that the motives were simply mercenary.

JEWISH FUNDAMENTALISM

Much of the following information is based on the writing of Gershom Gorenberg from his book, The End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for the Temple Mount. Mr. Gorenberg references published lectures, essays, and newspaper articles, by Rav Tzvi Yehuda and Shlomo Aviner, one of Gush Emunim's most prolific and influential ideologues, especially the article "Messianic Realism."

The basis of Jewish Fundamentalist fears hardly needs repeating. The Holocaust was perhaps the most dramatic case of genocide perpetrated against any group of people. And while it remains an over-riding motivational concern, Jews, like Christians and Muslims also fear the effects of modernization.

According to Jewish Fundamentalist interpretation of the Torah, the Jews are the chosen people, a special group, selected by God. Aviner argues that divine commandments to the Jewish people "transcend human notions of national rights." He explains that while God requires other, normal nations to abide by abstract codes of "justice and righteousness," such laws do not apply to Jews.

The Jews were granted unalienable rights to the entire Land of Israel, which stretches from the Nile River to the Euphrates River, as represented by the blue bars on the Israeli flag. Accordingly, Palestinians have absolutely no legitimate claim to nationhood or to any part of the country. They have experienced no real suffering, and have drawn together as an entity only out of opposition to the Jews. Theirs is a "suicidal" struggle for the elimination of the state and people of Israel. As such, Israel must recognize the Palestinians as the most destructive and dangerous emanation of Arab hostility, and stand ready to destroy them as they seek to fulfill their collective "death wish." Jewish extremists argue that the Palestinians, or Canaanites, have but three choices: flee, accept Jewish rule, or fight.

Since God made His covenant with the Jews, it is not for men to change, or compromise the terms and to do so would either threaten, or delay the eventual redemption of Israel and the whole world. The slogan of Gus Emunim is "The Land of Israel, for the People of Israel, according to the Torah of Israel." The chosen land and the chosen people comprise one completed, divine unity, as decreed by God.

To Fundamentalist Jews, there are have been three important events that define their historical progress: the Holocaust, the Six Day War, and the Yom Kippur War. As in mythic story structure, the Holocaust was God’s device to force the Jews to take up the challenge for their very survival.

The 1967 Six Day War is characterized as a religious event during which the Jews were delivered from peril and restored to the lost lands of Jerusalem and Judah. The 1973 Yom Kippur War, was the supreme test, in which Israel again triumphed and from which it emerged with superiority over the Arabs that would never be relinquished. This victory was again proof that the Jews were the chosen people and not subject to normal rules and limitations.

The common theme portrayed in the mass media is that the Arabs want only to destroy Israel and eliminate the Jews. In actuality, many fundamentalists Jews have nearly identical feelings toward the Arabs, plus a belief that they have special rights and entitlements, free from constraints of the court of world opinion or international law.

“There is no reason to pay attention to all the confusion of mankind produced by the transient nations of the world. Such petty confusions-who takes account of them? Think not of what happens outside, only put ourselves and our land in order, hearkening to the word of God and of his prophets.” - Yehuda Kook in "Between the People and Its Land," Artzi Vol.2 (Spring 1982)

”No state nor council of states has any right or authority whatsoever to interfere in the internal affairs of our state or in our settlement of our land. Our state has armed forces praised and admired throughout the world; neither do we depend on aid or intervention by any foreign power.... Our wonderful army is ready to fulfill its mission and insure the success of all our efforts to strike roots in the land, to settle in all parts of the land of our fathers, the sovereign state of which our prophets foretold, with no intervention by any other government in the military and political arrangements which we establish across the breadth of our land. And the Lord of hosts, the God of Jacob, will be with us and protect us. Selah. 51 - Tzvi Yehuda Kook, "And Again to Break the Yoke of the Gentiles from Our Neck," Artzi, vol.1(1982) p.3.

Little wonder that Israeli Defense Forces feel free to invade and re-occupy Palestinian territory at will, or that Zionist settlers feel justified in driving Palestinians from the land and establishing new settlements, with little concern that they might some day be required to return to their internationally mandated borders.

Militant Zionist settlers continually attack Palestinians, though such assaults are rarely reported in the media. They’ve also conducted high-profile terrorist attacks. In 1994, Baruch Goldstein, armed with an assault rifle, stormed a mosque in Hebron, killing 29 Muslim worshippers and wounded 150. Goldstein, a member of terrorist Kach movement, was beaten to death, but was hailed as a martyr by militant Zionists. This was not an isolated act. Yigal Amir later assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin in an effort to thwart the peace process. Fundamentalist Jews continue to oppose the peace process that could result in their being expelled from their illegal settlements in the West Bank and Gaza.

The 2005 removal of Jewish settlements in Gaza has provoked a political crisis that could restructure the Israeli government and threaten even the limited steps toward Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation.

MUSLIM FUNDAMENTALISM

The Qur'an (or Koran) is to Islam as the Bible is to Christianity and the Torah to Judaism and each is subject to considerable latitude in its interpretation. Islam links the spiritual with the temporal world and provides guidance regarding religion, life and society. The Sharia provides prescriptive codes for the behavior of the individual and society. Islamic fundamentalists advocate governing society by these tenets, while moderate Muslims prefer to accept more modern and progressive secular forms of government. Muslim countries have had virtually no experience with democracy. Their fate has traditionally been in the hands of authoritarian rulers and fate has not been kind.

The Arabs were first oppressed by a long series of authoritarian rulers, and later by the colonial powers Britain, France and Italy. After WWII, new Arab states were drawn with little concern to historic, cultural and ethnic traditions. These states have been ruled by military dictators, and self-imposed monarchies. Despite the regions vast oil reserves and wealth, prosperity have not filtered down to the masses. Arab leaders have been unable to unite the Arab states, oppose Israel, or develop economically. However, US and Western support has helped the elitist rulers maintain their hold on political and economic power.

The poor, disadvantaged, disenfranchised and hopeless often revert to the sanctuary of religion where they are taught to reject modernity and the western influence that has perverted their societies. Islamic fundamentalist clerics preach against the evil infidels of the West and portray their own cause as a jihad to expel the crusaders and purify their homelands and ultimately establish Islamic government (shari’a). Their ideal is a return to the period in history when the Islamic world was the bastion of civilization, and the Europeans were mired in the Dark Ages. These teachings don’t, however, explain how this will come about in a modern world.

Muslims are often taught to fear their leaders, their governments, the US, and the Europeans. Islamic clerics, like their Christian and Jewish counterparts, preach interpretations of the Qur’an that justify their political views and which inspire their more militant followers to acts of violence and the promise of martyrdom and salvation.

The word jihad means “struggle” and the Qur’an speaks of two types of jihad: the greater jihad is a personal struggle to find faith and God within each person, the lesser jihad is an external struggle against the forces of evil and non-believers. The Qur’an does not sanction war or killing, except in self-defense and it does not sanction suicide, however, extremist clerics have distorted its meaning to suit their motives. The results are all too well known.

Madrasses, or religious schools, are widespread throughout the Muslim world. Some teach traditional Islam, others have become centers fro teaching fundamentalist Islamist views, including the new interpretations of jihad, meant expel foreign influences and secular regimes and establish to government based on Islamist rule. The madrasses offer one of the few sanctuaries for young, impressionable, disenchanted and unemployed youth - recruits in the new Islamist jihad. Many of these schools receive financial support from the Saudi Arabia government in an effort to discourage preaching against the overthrow of the Saudi regime.

In addition to attacking Western interests, Islamist extremists like al-Qaeda have  set their sights on over-throwing the nuclear-capable, military dictatorship in Pakistan, and the regime in Saudi Arabia. Islamist pressure threatening Syria has coerced the Syrian regime to support, or at least tolerate Islamist activity in that state. Meanwhile, the downfall of the Hussein regime in Iraq has opened a window of opportunity to pursue increasing influence and power in post-war Iraq.

Islamists have established a new standard for violence and terrorism from airplane hijackings, kidnappings, bombings, suicide bombers and the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Their acts of violence are worse than those of Jewish and Christian extremists, but are in direct proportion to the degree of deprivation, fear and hopelessness that motivates them.

Of the major monotheistic religions only Islamist terrorists have adopted the use of suicide bombers or attacks against their brethren as a deterrent against cooperation with perceived infidels. Such deviations from the basic tenants of Islamic faith are evidence the distortions being used to justify the unjustifiable. Until recently, standard practice dictated that “jihad” could only be declared by an Imam issuing a fatwa, authorizing the faithful to take up arms to protect their faith from those who would threaten it.

In Iraq, al-Qaeda associates led have dispensed with such unnecessary religious complications and have launched relentless suicide attacks against Christians and Muslims alike. By abandoning the pretense of religious motivation, they have revealed the true nature of their cause.

In Iran, the so-called Islamic revolution led by Ayatollah Khomeni in 1979, soon reverted to the characteristics of typical authoritarian rule. Despite the pretext of fundamental religious faith, the new regime quickly adopted the use of repression, death squads and secret police to maintain social control over the Iranian people.

As is often the case with religious zealots, personal gain, social control, political power and money are often the ulterior motive for twisting and manipulating the poor and ignorant to fight their battles in the misguided belief that they will reap the ultimate rewards.

SUMMARY

Each of the three monotheistic religions derives guidance from their belief in God’s revealed teachings which emphasize charity and compassion for the poor, vulnerable and under privileged. These religions share more similarities than differences, with each outlining how people with conflicting personal interests can still get along with one another and maintain peaceful and functional societies that contribute to the common good.

Religious writings are subject to wildly different interpretation and can be used to justify opposing viewpoints. Often, man’s interpretations of these teachings are twisted and distorted to emphasize to their followers what they stand to gain rather than what they can give or share with others. It seems that fundamentalists, whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim, share a common fault that emphasizes personal gain above the welfare of others, and a belief that somehow this inherent selfishness and self-interest will ultimately be rewarded.

The irony is that religion taken to extremes is more likely the cause of violent conflict than a solution to it. More predictable is the fact that people exploit other people to advance selfish interests under the guise of religion.

3271