The Roots of Their Rage

Author Joel Rosenberg tells us that the Middle East is the scene of a struggle between moderate Muslims and radical Muslims - between peaceful people who called themselves Muslims and violent warmongers who want to follow every word of the Qur'an - and we see that those aggressive radicals have taken political control of many Islamic nations, and are trying to gain control of the others.

Looking at this situation, two questions arise: first, why are the moderates nearly invisible, to the extent that many foreigners doubt that they even exist in these nations? Second, why are the orthodox Muslims so filled with anger?

The answer, at its core, lies in the deep-seated feeling of shame, humiliation, failure, and impotence in the modern world that many Muslims feel today.

Historically, Islamic nations were once very powerful, and generated respect, awe, and fear in other cultures. It is painful for modern residents of these Middle Eastern countries to realize how far they have fallen - from the greatness of their past to the current condition. When one considers the progress made in recent decades - the writing of new software, the filing of patents, biochemical discoveries - little of it has happened in these nations. They are still aware of their glorious past, when Islamic armies

penetrated deep into Africa in the south and far into Russia in the north. It was Muslims who controlled the great trading routes of gold and silver and silk and slaves from Asia to Europe.

Ironically, Islam's greatness would be the cause of its humiliation: its ability to control these geopolitical variables would encourage other cultures to find ways to avoid trade in, around, or through regions under Muslim control. What do these nations say about themselves?

Today, Islamic journalists, academics, and politicians themselves say that the Muslim world is best known for tyranny, abject poverty of all but the elite, rampant corruption, violence, and terrorism. Despite the discovery of oil and fantastic wealth in Islamic territories, despite the rise of nationalism and the creation of nation-states after the departure of colonial Britain and France from the Middle East and North Africa, despite the widespread introduction of elementary and secondary schools and at least a basic education for hundreds of millions of children, the Islamic world at the dawn of the twenty-first century is mired in hopelessness and despair. The Muslim powers are not winning wars. The Muslim peoples are not making medical breakthroughs. They are not creating dramatic new technologies. Indeed, many Muslims note that their governments are barely able to feed their people or to provide them with enough meaningful jobs.

How did these formerly great societies fall so far? And can they be rejuvenated? The engineering and mathematical creativity which brought Arab, Persian, Egyptian, Ethiopian, and Nubian cultures to world prominence began to fade after those societies were oppressed by the invasions of Islamic armies. The intellectual curiosity which fueled philosophy and algebra could not keep its momentum after these cultures were forced to shed their native identities and conform to Islamic doctrine. The "brain drain" ensued, as the educated classes lost the freedom to explore new academic disciplines, and lost their willingness to do so. Can these societies re-invent themselves, and return to their former stations of greatness in science, technology, and academia? We do not now know the answer to this question. Can they shake off the rigid oppression of Islam? Can Persia - now called Iran - return to the glory it had before armies of Muslims invaded it and snuffed out its native culture? Can Egypt recapture the intellectual status it had prior to being invaded by Islamic armies who obliterated its tradition of ingenuity? We must watch and wait to learn the answers to these questions.

It was actually the early successes of the Muslims that planted the seeds of their own decline. When Islam was powerful and dominated the epicenter of the earth, travel through Muslim territories was treacherous and thus enormously costly for European traders. So the Europeans became determined to find a way to circumvent the Islamic world altogether. Hoping to find a way around the Horn of Africa and on to India and East Asia, they began exploring sea routes that could take them south from England, France, Spain, and Portugal along the African coastlines.

Such long and arduous naval voyages required more of the Europeans - more education, more technology, more risk-taking. They required building better ships, creating more accurate maps, and developing navigational skills. They required crafting more precise weather instruments and developing a deeper understanding of meteorology. To protect their men and ships from pirates, bandits, and competing colonialists, the Europeans had to develop better weapons and war-fighting techniques and technologies as well.

Islam's greatness and control inspired other cultures to become clever, in order to avoid falling under that control - by analogy, in the same way that Napoleon's greatness inspired the other nations to find ways to outwit him. Responding to the power of Islam, Europeans

developed an educational and technological infrastructure at home that enabled them to master the perilous seas and find their way east by sailing south. Eventually, Eastern wealth, spices, and other treasures returned to European nations via increasingly advanced shipping companies and navies.

As the Europeans kept finding safe routes to Eastern Asia, and finding ways to avoid the danger of traveling through Islamic lands,

the more knowledge and experience was gained. They learned about gunpowder and explosives from the Chinese. They discovered medicines and herbal remedies throughout the Orient. They came back with new ideas and a thirst for further insights.

Success bred success. Innovation led to more innovation, and this spirit of exploration blazed across Europe, leading men like Christopher Columbus to sail west to get to the East. In time, wooden ships gave way to steel. Wind power gave way to steam. Steam propulsion gave way to engines using fossil fuels. The Wright brothers discovered flight. Then came jumbo jets and fighter jets. Oil- and gas-powered engines gave way to nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers. Then came space travel. The Russians put a man in orbit. The American put a man on the moon.

By the dawn of the third millennium, global travel was possible in a way never before known in human history. Knowledge was increasing exponentially.

All of this dizzying progress began as a response to Islamic geo-political control. The fact that Islam had controlled trade created an incentive for the other nations to develop technologies to bypass and surpass Islam.

The Islamic world was being left behind. Yet, for the better of three hundred years, Muslims had no idea. They perceived themselves as the masters of the universe and Europeans as infidels and barbarians. They had little interest in noticing, examining, or caring about the tremendous advances in science and engineering that Western Christians were making. But eventually the invention and rapid spread of radio and television and global communications made it increasingly clear even to the uneducated masses within the Muslim world how enormous the gaps were between their world and the West.

This, then, is source of the rage and anger which Islam directs against the other nations. Is there a chance for moderate Muslims to direct this emotion into a constructive direction, and encourage their people to work to reawaken their scientific and intellectual powers, and again become a source of creativity in the world? Or will the radical Muslims cling to the notion of vengeance against other nations? Peaceful Muslims are trying to focus their nations on making progress; warlike Muslims simply cling to the directives requiring hostility toward the rest of the world. Which side will win? Whether the coming century is one of war or peace between the Middle East and the rest of world depends on this.

Defying Killers

When confronted by murderous regimes, a nation needs a gifted leader - a man or woman with wisdom and courage. America had exactly that when one of the world's most bloodthirsty governments initiated an unprovoked attack. Professor John Greene at Cazenovia College explains:

At 3:10 AM on Monday, May 12, 1975, the Cambodian Khmer Rouge government fired upon the American merchant ship Mayaguez, then sailing in the Gulf of Siam; Cambodian sailors boarded the ship and took its crew prisoner. When captured, the Mayaguez was headed from Hong Kong to U.S. bases in Sattahip, Thailand, and was carrying a load of commercial Department of Defense cargo, including spare parts and supplies but not arms. Nevertheless, Cambodia defended the action, claiming that the Mayaguez had strayed outside international waters and had, in fact, trespassed on Cambodian territory. At the time of her capture, the Mayaguez was about seven miles from Poulo Wai, an island claimed both by South Vietnam and Cambodia; however, as a matter of policy, the United States recognized an international limit of only three miles.

With the lives of American sailors hanging in the balance, President Gerald Ford knew that he must be tough with the Cambodian government, which had demonstrated its ruthlessness by murdering millions of its own citizens. They would not hesitate to kill a handful of foreigners. Ford ordered the Marines to land on a Cambodian island, a few miles off the coast, and ordered the Air Force to immediately start bombing operations over Cambodia. Within a few hours, the Cambodians surrendered the American boat and its crew. President Ford both rescued the lives of the sailors and prevented any further such attacks by demonstrating forcefully his commitment to a simple, old, and powerful principle: the first task of a government is to protect the lives of its citizens. With decisive and forceful action, President Ford showed that the United States would not tolerate the abuse and disrespect of the genocidal thugs who had illegitimately taken control of Cambodia's government.

Some Are, Some Are Not

In the study of history, ancient or modern, we must be careful to avoid oversimplifications. In the modern mind, there is a linkage between the words 'Arab' and 'Muslim' - but this glosses over complexities.

For example, in Michigan, more than half of the state's Arabs are not Muslims, and more than half of the state's Muslims are not Arabs. This statistic requires some digesting.

This principle applies outside of Michigan, around the world. Millions of Arabs in the Middle East are, in fact, not Muslims. This can be understood by reviewing a definition: the word 'Arab' refers not only to people in Saudi Arabia, but to large groups living in areas like Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and other countries. Note, however, that most people in Iran are not Arabs; they are Persians.

Prior to the year 640 A.D., most Arabs were Christians, some were Jews, a few belonged to other religions. It may seem shocking from a modern perspective, but if you had traveled through Iraq, Iran, Egypt, or Syria in the year 600 A.D., you would have seen dozens of churches and no mosques. Higher education had been introduced, and seminaries in these countries trained scholars.

All of that changed suddenly when Islamic armies roared through the region in the late 600's and early 700's A.D., destroying the physical structures of other religions - churches and synagogues - and outlawing expressions of any faith outside of Islam. Small communities of Jews and Christians clung to their faith, under harsh oppression, in hidden ways.

In the Middle East today, after a thousand years of underground existence, these communities still make their presence felt, even when public expression of their belief is illegal. But rather than merely continuing to exist, these communities are now attracting other Arabs. Joel Rosenberg, from Syracuse University, explains:

For many Muslims, despair and despondency at what they see as the utter failure of Islamic governments and societies to improve their lives and give them peace, security, and a sense of purpose and meaning in life are causing them to leave Islam.

Many of these Arabs, perhaps without realizing it, are returning to their roots, to the heritage from the time when Arabia, Persia, and Babylonia (Iraq) were home to millions of Christians - who were allowed to practice their faith freely, and who allowed others to practice their faiths. Could the Arab world be shaking off the oppression which has blanketed it for the last one thousand years, and returning to a time of individual liberty?

For other Muslims, it is not depression but rage that is driving them away from the Qur'an and the mosque. They are seeing far too many Muslim leaders and governments and preachers both advocating and acting out cruelty toward women and children and violence even against fellow Muslims.

We cannot think of the Middle East simply as 'the Muslim world': it is a complex region, home to several different religious groups; it has changed, and will continue changing, in ways we might not be able to predict.