| Islamofascism and Islamophobia | |||
|
|
By: Kishan Bhatia October 02, 2006 Views expressed here are author’s own and not of this website. Full disclaimer is at the bottom. 
Feedback
Part I Contrary to American defense of Mr. Musharraf’s role in the War on Terrorism, globally Pakistan is viewed as the epicenter of religious extremism and terrorism against America and the West because its prime ruling elites – generals, clerics, feudal and Western educated pundits – have oriented the politics to radical Islamic causes across the globe and neglected for several decades creating a stable and prosperous nation at peace with itself and in harmony with secular nations. Ruling elites of Pakistan have aligned their international politics with other Sunni Islamic nations as two-thirds of Muslims in the crescent from Lebanon to Malaysia are Sunnis. Culturally and socially Muslims of Middle East and South Asia belong to Arab, Persian or South Asian heritage. Middle Eastern Sunnis are primarily of Arab origin, Shias are mostly of Persian origin and contrary to what some politically motivated politicians have claimed, Pakistanis are primarily of South Asian origin, not Arabs or Persians. Pakistan"s 166 million Muslims have Sunni majority (about 70%) and balance is mostly Shia Muslims. The Middle East population is about 55% Sunni (spread across Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and Syria) and balance Shia (spread across Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and other Muslim nations). Among all these nations Pakistan is the poorest, both economically and in energy resources. It is most aggressive in seeking American patronage to become Sunni dominated nation as a regional power. Among Shia dominated nations Iran is flush with oil revenues and aggressively confronting America for regional domination. Two threats to survival of Muslim nations are ever growing sectarian wars and a potential clash of civilization. Sectarian wars are the cancer for Muslim nations and the clash of civilization may be precipitated by leadership of Muslim nations who have failed to appreciate that individually or collectively all Muslim nations can’t match technological superiority in digital and WMD warfare areas enjoyed by America and the West. Like volcano, the eruption of sectarian violence among Shia and Sunnis of the Muslim crescent from Ankara to Islamabad is unpredictable but with each eruption consequences are very devastating for Muslims, all in the name of Islam. The Muslim nations in general and in Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan in particular, violent sectarianism is alive and kicking even though the media, the government and the political parties are mostly in denial about its consequences. Nothing kills Muslims like sectarianism and a civil war is being blamed in Iraq for Sunnis killing Shias and vice a versa. The man who plunged Iraq into this sectarian hell, Abu Musab Zarqawi, was trained and primed with sectarian politics in terrorist camps of Pakistan. Pakistan has been steadily killing its religious leaders and other prominent citizens since 1986 when the three major Deobandi seminaries in Karachi, Lahore and Nowshehra issued fatwas declaring the Shia community apostates. Other sects declared apostates in Pakistan include Ismailis and Bahais. The international borders for many Muslim nations from Ankara to Islamabad as they exist today were arbitrarily drawn by self-interested Britain and France, two colonial powers that had occupied much of the region for more than a century. These borders suited political necessities of the imperial European powers. The unilateral implementation of the Durand line divided Baluchistan and Afghanistan to benefit British India. Pakistan continues to hold these territories after he partition of British India. The demise of last Turkish Empire at the end of WWI allowed Britain and France to redraw national boundaries in the Middle East dividing Kurd lands into three parts; Turkey, Iraq and Iran occupy one of three parts of Kurd lands. The decline of imperial European nations after the WWII and the rise of America as a sole super power after the end of the Cold War in early 1990s, created new political dynamics in Muslim lands from Ankara to Islamabad. Among the nations of the region Shia Iran and Sunni Pakistan, not being status quo nations tried to gain regional power status by exploiting the religious extremism and jihadi terrorism to assert their political ambitions. The counter measures including invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq taken by America and its allies in response to the attacks on America on 9/11/2001 have yet to deliver desired political results for America and the West. Non-state Islamic terrorist – al Qaeda operatives and Overseas Pakistanis in Europe - have staged sectarian violence in Iraq, a resurgent Taliban is challenging American and NATO forces in Afghanistan and terrorist have also bombed trains in Madrid (2004), London (2005) and Mumbai, India (2006). The two world theory gained considerable press during 33-day war between non-state Hezbollah and Israel in July-August 2006; while President Bush and many pundits in America and the West were calling actions of Hezbollah and its supporters in Muslim lands as Islam fascists, the pundits of Muslim nations were invoking the two world theory to suggest the clash of civilization if not deriding America and the West as Islam phobic. A possibility for redrawing of borders for nations from Ankara to Islamabad was discussed in a recent article by Ralph Peters, “Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look” in the Air Forces Journal, HTTP://WWW.ARMEDFORCESJOURNAL.COM/2006/06/1833899). In the new map published with the paper Pakistan is reduced in size to territory of Sindh and Punjab and areas beyond the Duran Line returned to Afghanistan and Baluchistan, which is shown as an independent state. If American guided efforts to establish democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan fail and certain Muslim nations and non-state actors including al Qaeda continue to unleash attacks on America, the West and India then a potential for a wider war exists. At the end of such a war (it may well be a World War III or the clash of civilization) the nations - America and the West - with overwhelming superiority in digital and WMD technologies are most likely to be left standing, while the Islamic nations from Ankara to Islamabad are likely to suffer humiliations that come with redrawn borders. There are many faces of political Islam in the world today and several senior Pakistani commenter have regularly presented a new face as more and more terrorist related stories connected to Pakistan appear. Among many Muslim expatriate communities in the West, those of Pakistan origin have been aggressively for Islamic extremism. The mostly Western educated elites fail to inform readers that followers of non-Islamic faith have no quarrels with religion of Islam and the jihad is a tool of the political Islam to globally propagate radical causes. Leaders in America and the West are in denial that Mr. Musharraf is a problem in dealing with War on Terrorism. Mr. Musharraf has followed a dual policy of hunting with America and running with jihadist. The relationship between the army and jihadist is symbiotic rather than adversarial. The details of recently foiled terrorist plot to bomb ten airliners flying from UK to USA show that the army plays up the terrorist threat in order to consolidate its position in Western capitals, while at best turning a blind eye to the violence Pakistani terrorist export. Some elites acknowledge that hate and intolerance associated with Islamic teachings breed insecurities among followers of Islam. The secular nations have neither use for radical and revolutionary aspects of Arabic socialistic political Islam, nor that of inherently discriminatory shariah system of laws and hence the Islamic legal and political systems are inappropriate in secular environment. Politically driven Muslims scholars and pundits refuse to acknowledge that like any other legal system, shariah is a man-made legal system originally developed by narrow-minded tribes of Arabia in seventh century and it is incompatible with legal system of modern secular nations. In fact even in many Islamic nations the shariah system is practiced selectively, as they recognize corrosive nature of the shariah and political Islam in modern context. Ideologies of political Islam are cancerous to social, cultural, economic and political norms in the secular democracies. The level of internal insecurities in the secular Western nations with critical mass of Muslim population is on the rise as Muslims using the two world theory have started demanding rights to practice shariah. Radicalization of Muslims settled in America and the West starts with imported radical clerics teaching and preaching Muslims to be loyal to Islam and then to their land of origin, not the adopted land. Many Overseas Pakistanis have shunned integration into mainstream society in a bid to retain their cultural heritage thereby depriving themselves of available opportunities in the adopted land. The brainwashed Muslims settled in America in general and the West in particular, who identify themselves with Islam have tended to form parallel societies. A consequence of such practices in Europe has been to isolate and concentrate Muslims in ghettos, which leads to their alienation from better educated and prosperous Europeans and inhibits them from adopting modern practices of being better educated to generate wealth and take advantages of a variety of opportunities in other areas for personal well-being. Pakistani ruling classes with imperial ambitions are beset with the cold war mentality. For secular democratic nations – America, the West, India and Japan to name a few - the global agenda is not imperialism or colonization, apartheid and foreign domination, which meant confrontation, but terrorism, energy security, the environment and health issues such as HIV/AIDS, bird flue, etc., which demand cooperation and coordination among all nations. The stale ideology of the political Islam to promote imperialism or caliphate is history for secular democratic nations. Part II Recounting some of many faces of Islam typical elite, Mr. Ayman Fakir uses usual rhetoric to propagate the two world theory sowing seeds for the "Clash of Civilization." If it is not the Jewish Israel, it is Christians or Hindus to be blamed for failures of Muslims to live peacefully in their respective neighborhoods. By dividing the globe into two worlds in which the Islamic world is in ideological opposition to the liberal non-Islamic secular world - globalize, interdependent world of political and economic liberalism – an attempt is to create a perception of unified Islamic world. The reality is that it is anything but unified judging from agendas of various Islamic sects, with each sect attempting to dominate all others. Unlike non-Islamic secular world, the Islamic Um’mah (world) is politically fractured and economically degraded. Many Western educated Pakistani elites look at the global developments through glasses colored with Arabic socialist political Islam and a mindset frozen in the past to promote radical causes and revolutions in vicarious pursuit of past Islamic glories. The proponents for military conquests have yet to comprehend that secular nations have moved on from the political model that delivered successes before 19th century. A winning political formula for most developed non-Islamic secular nations is to build incomparable economic power using global commercial successes and to use sophisticated military and digital technologies for defending freedoms, not for imperialistic territorial expansions represented by a mindset to establish next Caliphate, the imperial Islamic power. A frequent Muslim rhetoric is to accuse America and the West of imperialism. I paraphrase Mr. A. Cowasjee and ask, why would sane leaders of any secular nation want to take over any impoverish, over-populated Islamic nations full of narrow-minded, ignorant and illiterate people dominated by few self-serving autocratic ruling elites – generals, clerics, feudal and such - with superiority complex and a mindset frozen in the past? A serious look at world's 57 Islamic nations shows true face of the Arabic socialistic political Islam, which is basically autocratic – not egalitarian, democratic – and infested with narrow-minded ruling elites determined to protect their privileges and if possible, exploit religious extremism for personal and political gains. For example, in my opinion, the Pakistani politics under Mr. Musharraf is an on-going comedy by three stooges – Moe, Curly and Larry - represented by generals, feudal and clerics. For seven years General Moe has disseminated civilian leadership of centrist parties and by smashing heads of hand-picked civilian leadership - Curly and Larry - from the feudal and cleric ranks to stay in power as the dictator of Pakistan. Ruling elites of Muslim nations have a macho mentality and superiority complex. In case of Pakistan, to compensate for internal insecurities and weaknesses it maintains a huge army, which is as large as that of America and it also has sophisticated weapons. Compared to America it is an insignificant power so all it can do with its army is to threaten peace in South Asia - both to east and west of Pakistan. During dictatorships of President Zia ul-Haq and that of President Musharraf to collect billions in “rent” payments, otherwise know as American economic and military aid Pakistan served as an American frontline state – against Soviets occupation of Afghanistan (in 1980s) and as a member of War on Terrorism (starting late 2001). Other Muslim nations of the same class include Egypt and Jordan. Like Pakistan each of these states lack necessary economic strengths to maintain a huge army; so they too are reduced to being client states of America, the global superpower interested in maintaining regional hegemony by making "rent" payments. The pattern of behavior among these otherwise adversarial nations conforms to the principle of the dhimmah or a treaty except in these cases there is a role reversal - Islamic nations are subservient to a secular nation. Each of these three nations is economically poor and has poor leaderships – both civilian and military – dominating underdeveloped human resources. There is a viable alternate solution to tackle Pakistan's social, cultural, political and economic problems. That solution lies in developing its 166 million strong human resources. Given a determined leadership to develop human resources with modern education there is potential for evolving a new breed of strong civilian leadership to send generals and army packing back to barracks. Couple it with rectifying structural economic problems so that entrepreneurial Pakistanis can exploit creativity of its skilled knowledge workers to generate wealth for personal and national well being. It is a slow but sure process as can be seen from developments in China, Brazil and India – three nations that are in the process of regaining "real" strengths and confidence in nation's abilities in a competitive globalize world. My suggestion to elite Pakistanis is to forget the two world theory; for like it or not, there is only one world and all Muslims need to do is to learn to live in peace in a secular environment that protects all religious faiths. Those like Mr. Fakir who fail to comprehend peaceful methods of progress may continue to glorify radical and revolutionary causes in a futile attempt to divert attention away from internal failures of Muslim nations. The boasting of Mr. Fakir may stop should he ever ponder on to realize that 7th to 19th century military concepts are outdated in the 21th century when digital technology and sophisticated weapons have transformed war methodologies. Confronted with growing wrath of Islamic religious extremism propagated by Islam fascists some in secular non-Islamic free world have developed Islam phobia, which may lead to unintended consequences for Muslims. In a digitally connected world with sophisticated weapons, at the end of the "Clash of Civilization" only nations standing would be those with superiority in the digital technology and overwhelming nuclear firepower. Part III Islam phobia and Islam fascists are two sides of same coin that gained currency immediately after the violent American actions in Afghanistan and Iraq in response to humiliation it suffered as a result of attacks by airline hijacking terrorists on 9/11/2001. Many Muslim settled in America and the West labeled American response of the War on Terrorism as Islamophobia. Existence of Israel in the Middle East has invoked violent reactions from most Muslim nations of the region and Muslims advocating destruction of Israel have been labeled Islamofascists by President Bush and others who insist that Israel has every right to exists in the Middle East. Is Islamophobia the source of the War on Terrorism and for actions of European countries – U.K., France, Denmark, Spain and Netherlands – against the internal uprising in the Muslim ghettos? Is Islamofascism supporting the two world theory to sow seeds of the Clash of Civilization? What is the mindset that justifies Muslim in America and the West to label actions of America in Afghanistan and Iraq and that of European nations against internal unrest festering in the Muslim ghettos as Islamophobia? What criteria define Islamofascists to apply leadership of Iran and Pakistan who seek regional dominance, that of Hezbollah and Hamas for instigating war against Israel and that of many Pakistan based terrorist organizations (Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), Jama’at ud-Dawa (JUD), and Jaish-e Mohammed (JEM)) that are being implicated for the foiled plot to blow up as many as ten airliners flying between UK and USA? Some answers to these questions follow in next two parts. Americans have been a part of the history of global terrorism. In Middle East and Pakistan Americans instigated right-wing religious organizations, military and civil officials willing to patronize religious extremists during the Cold War. Even before Afghanistan and the Soviet intervention, several radical groups were encouraged and financed by the US. That al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is an American product may be an exaggeration, but not entirely wrong. Soviet defeat in Afghanistan was followed in 1991 by collapse of Soviet Union creating a regional political vacuum. A sense of victory in Afghanistan left radical Muslims with a grand sense of ‘macho-ness’ and a superiority complex, both moral and strategic. Pakistan tried to fill the political vacuum by backing totally reactionary causes like the Pakistani Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and defending Taliban and al Qaeda actions until its economy was ruined. The event of the 9/11 forced economically starved Musharraf administration to accept an American offer he couldn’t refuse and get on American payroll as an American “poodle.” In secular nations, the primary duty of citizen is to obey the state and what they do with their souls is a matter between themselves and God. In secular states all religions must bow down to the sovereign authority if they are to exist within its jurisdiction. Muslim sects’ rebel against such secular ideas since it contradicts the claim of the shariah to be the final legal authority. Unlike in secular democracies that honor equality for both sexes, equality of legal rights and protection of property rights for all citizens of every religion, the shariah is inherently discriminatory against women and the followers of non-Islamic faiths. Extremist or fascist Muslims denounce the secular laws as blasphemy arguing that mortals who make laws for their own government usurp a power which is God’s alone. But Koran and shariah were written by tribal Arabs, not God; in 21st century the seventh century vintage prophet to Muslims is simply a scholar of dubious qualifications to most followers of non-Islamic faiths. Muslims display ferocious anger at any attempt to challenge, to ridicule or to marginalize Muslim faith and feel justified invoking religious extremism against the perceived offending parties. Islam means submission, not peace. Koran tells us that there is no compulsion in matter of religion. Muslims likes Mr. Fakir preach the supremacy of religious practices based on tradition or the Sunnah and they zealously try to propagate radical and revolutionary practices ignoring that followers of non-Islamic faiths have moved on from stale ideas represented by the seventh century political Islam. Islam fascism is characterized by hate, violent intolerance and implementation of discriminatory shariah practices against women and followers of non-Islamic faiths. Religious extremism is a sign of deep-down insecurities of the Muslim psyche in the modern world. Muslims maintain that Koran must never be questioned. The blood-curding utterances of many politically motivated Muslim clerics contradict the idea of Islam being a “religion of peace.” Muslim communities in the West and America maintain that Islam must be described as a religion of peace and jokes about the prophet or any attempt to challenge, to ridicule or to marginalize Muslim faith are no-no. Any skepticism or sarcasm by followers of non-Islamic faiths against Islam is greeted with cynicism and cries of the “Christian Crusades” or “Jewish-Hindu” conspiracies against Islam. Islam fascists maintains that the followers of non-Islamic faith are not submitting to the God’s will and hence they can be discriminated against. To Islam fascists the best the followers of non-Islamic faith can hope for is to be protected by dhimmah or a treaty, and the privileges of the dhimmi are purchased by onerous taxation and humiliating rites of subservience. As for apostates, it remains as dangerous today as it was in the times of the prophet publicly to renounce the Muslim faith. Radical Islamist, Mr. Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian in his manifesto, Milestones (1964) developed the concept of tafkir, a process of declaring other Muslims to be apostates. Now, not only followers of non-Islamic faith but also Muslims of other sects judged by radical fundamentalists using criteria offered by Mr. Qutb are considered apostates! Even if one cannot be compelled to adopt the faith, Islam fascists insists that one can certainly be compelled to retain it. Why should sane people and secular governments that encourage human growth and evolution through innovation and creativity agree to accept stale ideals of seventh century Islam advocated by the closed minded Islam fascism? According to Mr. Qutb Islam’s enemies included Muslim governments that did not implement Sharia law and he wanted secular Middle Eastern governments excommunicated from the Muslim community. Al Qaeda’s second in command, Mr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian doctor and radical jihadist, is a follower of Mr. Qutb. The reason why jihad could be directed at the Muslim rulers in many parts of the Muslim world had already been developed by Qutb as tafkir in Milestones. The doctrine needed more than a vanguard; it required an organizationon that could be used to spread it. That was founded in 1988 as Al Qaeda by Osama bin Laden, Al Zawahiri and a number of other Egyptians. ‘Qaeda’ is an Arabic word meaning base or primer. Unlike in Islamic nations, secular nations offer political equality and respect for followers of all religious faiths. Muslim settled in secular America and the West understands that culturally people of secular lands respect others beliefs as long as these beliefs pose no threat to civil order. We are witnessing exploitation of the secular nation’s hospitality by Muslims communities in U.K., France, Denmark and some other European nations to establishing parallel societies that ignore local established political, social, cultural and economic norms. In countries like U.K and France - with a critical mass of Muslim population - radical Muslims have started invoking the two world theory to demand implementation of shariah and a rule based on the political Islam. The two nation theory worked for creation of Pakistan in South Asia only because the departing colonial power intended to play a political mischief. The non-Islamic free secular nations have no place for the politically motivated Muslim communities with the two world theory. Islamic terrorism has been routinely defended by Muslim leadership made up of three segments - autocratic rulers of Islamic nations, politically motivated Muslim clerics and Western educated Muslim elites regularly interacting globally through print and electronic media. Basically, the Muslims are in ideological opposition to the liberal non-Islamic world. The liberal world cultivates scientific innovations to build a military power that is second to none and exploits entrepreneurial innovations and creativity of developed human resources to make economic gains through commerce. Islamic pundits subscribe to duplicating the past glories through military conquests. The proponents of the two world theory are fermenting Islam fascism and the Clash of Civilization for political gains. Secular nation politicians’ inability to effectively confront Islamic fundamentalist and their supporters has allowed Islam fascists to gain public attention. The policy of political correctness has inhibited leaders of secular nations from confronting Muslim communities and to urge its people to openly condemn the radical theology fueling Islamic fascism. The book, “Londonistan” attributes the charges of Islam phobia to the failures of secular leadership to critically examine the issue of Islam fascism. The policy of appeasement of radical Islamism and the Muslim communities in a panic stricken attempt to curry favor and buy off the chances of any further attacks has led to charges of Islam phobia. To avoid slipping into the moral equivocation and multicultural paralysis of the West, secular nations must begin to unashamedly assert the superiority of secular values and the secular way of life. Part IV Whether or not Samuel Huntington’s prophecy of the “Clash of Civilization” materializes it has given fodder to many media pundits to periodically alarm the public and to some Muslim elites to propagate a perception of a two world theory. As events in the Middle East and South Asia continue to unfold the American hegemony may be facing challenges by two Islamic nations; Sunni dominated Pakistan and Shia dominated Iran. The two nations are not status quo powers. The two Muslim nations with acquired or soon to be acquired nuclear capabilities aspire to be regional (and may be global) political powers. Muslim pundits propagating a perception of a “War of Civilization” are mischievously attempting not to address the internal strife and sectarian violence within Islamic nations. The “Clash of Civilization” coloration is becoming a handy alibi to cover their infirmities. Both Pakistan and Iran have been engaging psychological terrorism associated with the nuclear diplomacy. For seven years of his autocratic rule in Pakistan, General Musharraf has threatened use of WMDs on several occasions each time India considered aggressive defensive measures to counter terrorist attacks instigated by operatives from Pakistan. In a similar way Iran has threatened destruction of Israel to counter global pressure to terminate its nuclear programs. America helped expose the notorious Dr. A. Q. Khan network for nuclear technology proliferation to Iran and North Korea. Dr. Khan’s network operated with blessings of General Aslam Beg, the ex-army chief of Pakistan during early 1990s. General Beg in 1991 had let it be known that if Pakistan was attacked by any nation it will use nuclear retaliation against India and he had advised Iran to threaten nuclear attacks against Israel if confronted by the West and America. Shia Iran seeks political domination of the Middle East and Sunni Pakistan has been engaged in proxy wars for dominating the Central and South Asia. Pakistan’s ISI and other intelligence organizations have been harboring violent militias – Pakistani Taliban, Arab dominated al Qaeda, and religious extremist based Lashkars and their many offshoots including Jamaats - to further a political agenda of the global terrorism in areas of South and Central Asia. For years, they have instigated proxy wars using jihadis or mercenary religious extremists to promote global presence of Pakistan. Although these tactics have not gone according to plan, Pakistani spooks and sundry hawks feel they have been instrumental in tying down hundreds of thousands of Indian troops in Kashmir, that they have taught America a lesson on 9/11/2001 through its covert support of al Qaeda activities and by spreading acts of terrorism in other parts of world using some misguided communities of Overseas Pakistanis. The foiled plot to blow up multiple airlines from UK to America is the latest such example. The responses to the on-going crisis in Lebanon and Afghanistan show that America uses Israel to conduct proxy wars against Hezbollah in Middle East and Pakistan to contain Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan. While Israel is very aggressive against Hezbollah, which has threatened its existence, Pakistani attempts to challenge Taliban and al Qaeda has been open to question. Pakistan’s existence is not threatened by these terrorist organizations but Pakistan is a beneficiary of “rent” collection opportunities they created. An unintended consequence of America attempting to establish a Western style democracy in Iraq was creation of a Shia crescent in northern Middle East from Lebanon to Iran. Iran has cultivated a client in Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah dominated Hezbollah in Lebanon. America applied pressure on Iran by calling it a member of "the axis of evil" and Iran countered with Nasrallah/Hezbollah to corner both Israel and America. After 33 days of war, the Israel-Hezbollah conflict is unresolved except that Israel has lost the public relations war to Hezbollah. So where is the world headed to? At present, Israel, America and its Sunni dominated client states are in one corner and Iran with its Shia dominated nations and Hezbollah in Lebanon are in other corner. The violence in Afghanistan is mostly in south across from tribal dominated Pakistani provinces and Pakistan is sand-bagging control of Taliban and al Qaeda infiltrations from its territory. If the Sunni client states of America were to split in a show of Islamic solidarity to join Shia forces against America and Israel then America may be facing a major international crisis. Alternately, America may turn Syria into an additional client state by showering it with the "rent" payments as it does for Egypt, Jordan and Pakistan. It may even help build and financially support Lebanon army to isolate Iran and Nasrallah dominated Hezbollah. Unless America manages to bring about realignment along the lines I have suggested, there is a potential for the War on Terrorism to be perceived as the “Conflict of Civilization.” The liberal Western coalition forces in association with Israel and may be India, may challenge another coalition of the Islam fascists-radical-religious extremist from the Shia and Sunni dominated nations to set a stage for the “Conflict of Civilization.” An affirmation of the principal of the survival of the fittest is linked to the “Conflict of Civilization.” The global developments are dominated by advances in digital and sophisticated weapons technologies. If the “Clash of Civilization” should materialize, is it incomprehensible that at the end of the “Conflict of Civilization” only nations standing will be those with access to digital and massive WMD superiority? Are ruling elites of two nuclear Islamic Nations so irrational as to invite self annihilation? Rhetoric of chauvinistic Muslims not withstanding, it is an unlikely possibility. Kishan Bhatia
Send your views to author Do you wish to reach our readers?
submit
your guest column |
Previous articles by: |