Charlie Hebdo: Islam vs islamism

0003S06V8MF92JIX-C116-F4The day after tragedy in the office of the French satiric magazine Charlie Hebdo, politicians and most of the journalists, keeping the political correctness, express their outrage on the extremists, fanatics or just criminals. But most of the social networks and some right-wing politicians and media put it straight: Islam, as the whole, is guilty.  Muslims at all, according to them, are not capable of peaceful living in the western and also in any other culture. Most peoples say Muslims are guilty, because they do not want to integrate with other societies. They are violent because their religion is aggressive.

There are two groups of people like me, who call for the understanding. Not for tolerance of any kind of behaviour and any extremism, but fair treatment of any people despite the religion. One group, after such barbaric act – joined the chorus of those who desire the revenge on all Muslims. Others, try to stay reasonable, search for the sources of problem, and methods of treatment – not further radicalisation.

Radicalism is the thing we need to deny and condemn. Fighting Muslim minorities, is counter productive for peace and stability and same cruel as tragedy in Paris. Sending „them” back… but where? „They” were born in the Western countries. „Their” ancestors were often persuaded to come to Europe to work for the rich societies. For Europe to be tolerant meant allowing for everything according to „multi-culti” approach, which was a tragic mistake. West sponsored even people who were known from radicalism, because they were meant to „normalise” and praise their „benefactors”. When in Trafalgar Square British flag was torn or burned none got arrested because those who did it were „Muslims” – so we can’t provoke them. When in British city Rotherham young girls were raped systematicly (Dennis Prager 1,400 English Girls Raped by Multiculturalism (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/387428/1400-english-girls-raped-multiculturalism-dennis-prager) it was also called „political correctness” and „tolerance”. Not to provoke „Muslims”. Rotherham became a tragic and sad symbolic result of so called „tolerance” and inter-cultural politics of the West.

By the time in the Middle East, societies produced new name for people who just use the Islam, but are in fact very far from Quran. The word is „Islamism”. Islamism is not any religion and it is not connected to Islam, just uses Islam insulting it in fact. My friend from Iran @SaloumehZ in summer 2014 called it islamo-fascism  (https://twitter.com/search?q=saloumehz%20islamofacism&src=typd). She is an opposition to the so called „moderate” Iranian regime which executes from political reasons, second highest number of people in the world, just after China. West negotiate with Iran and just few days ago prezident Obama called Iran a ‚Very Successful Regional Power’ (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-iran-can-be-very-successful-regional-power_822522.html). My friend from Egypt wrote that radicals high-jacked the Egyptian Revolution (https://twitter.com/search?q=pharaohn%20radicals&src=typd). And yet West just condemned it’s new (military) president – Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, even if he was supported by the vast majority of Egyptians. President el-Sisi just day before the massacre in Paris called for a ‚religious revolution’ (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/06/africa/egypt-president-speech/), asking Muslim leaders to help in the fight against extremism. These are just a few examples of calls from the Middle East. Those calls are for those who cares and who could make a change. Yet the policy of the Western powers, was, and it is still, composed of the two most destructive points: 1. total „tolerance” in the West, and 2. conflicting for the oil and gas in the Middle East. In short, we start conflicts, which produce destabilization, to reach-out for the energy sources and because of this destabilization and lack of perspectives many immigrants come to the Europe. Between them many are extremists. For those people we create the best possible ground for further radicalisation and dragging there others. We not only tolerated their schools, universities, which are completely separate from the country education system (like it is with MeK – Mujahadeen-e-Khalq), but also finance their radical ideas and actions.

In the same time we call the Middle Eastern leaders to be more „moderate” in fighting the extremism. Imprisoning of journalists in Egypt is of course unacceptable, but from other side, Egypt have to curb radicals who try to connect to the ISIS. If Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and/or Bedouin tribes from Sinai establish permanent links to ISIS, but also to AQAP from Yemen, AQ and other extremists from Libya and Hamas, and get sponsorship from Qatar, it will be to late to regret, that another country fell into the chaos! There is a need of support for the regimes which have support of the people in their country, and are not hostile to the region or neighbours, even if they cross the line of the so called „Western democracy”. We should answer ourselves the questions like that: why president of Egypt do not start any persecutions of the Christians or even Shiites, and have a good relations with the Jews? Why he has still strong support of vast majority of Egyptians, despite deep economical crisis? Is El-Sisi aggressive toward his neighbours? In fact thanks to the GCC and Egyptian diplomacy right now he reconcile even with Qatar, what is very well visible, diminishing the tensions, and cutting off the financial support for the extremists. During Morsi’s presidency Egypt was radicalising inside, religious militias started to introduce sharia law. Outside, there was a growing tension with neighbours – strong political conflict and even sounds of possible military actions when president Morsi was struggling with Ethiopia over the Nile Dam project. Under Sisi there are no such conflicts. His primary opponents are the Muslim Brotherhood, who are the same Sunni branch.

As a conclusion, we need to see the difference between Muslims and islamists. Muslims know the difference very well, they underline it, and they also try to realise it to us. We have to understand it and we have to be on the same side with them against islamists. Western generalisations and radicalism, because of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, will not repair anything. Outrageous crying to send all Muslims back to the Middle East is nonsense. Searching for revenge on Muslims is even more than nonsense – its wrong, because when Islamists shout – that all Western people have to die, there are no innocent people in Europe or USA, we would do the same pointing at all Muslims as criminals. It is the path with death end. As I wrote almost two years ago, repeated it in December, (https://mmilczanowski.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/syria-government-rebels-extremists/), I will write it again: We have to fight extremists – islamists – islamo-fascists in the Europe and support such fight in the Middle East. Fighting have to be made by the proper law – in the European countries, denying islamism, in the same way as fascism, international law, diplomacy, or, if it is necessary, by military. Fighting them should be proceeded together with Middle-eastern partners not just when IS is threatening. But also we should see our interest in the Middle East more long-sighted. Stabilization in the Middle East can be brought, and it would be beneficial first for the middle-eastern societies but then also for the Europe and for the USA, but the right perspective and very good policy is needed.

Reklamy

4 myśli na temat “Charlie Hebdo: Islam vs islamism

Skomentuj

Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:

Logo WordPress.com

Komentujesz korzystając z konta WordPress.com. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Facebooku

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Google+

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google+. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Connecting to %s