Previous article - Part 2: Lessons of the Cold War
For many Western opinion leaders, the goal of opposing terrorists, of preventing the conflict from turning into a “clash of religions,” and of discrediting the radicals’ interpretation of Islam, made it seem all the more advisable to support the more benign strains within Islam—but which ones, exactly, and with what concrete goal in mind? Identifying the elements that should be supported, choosing appropriate methods, and defining the goals of such support is difficult.
It is no easy matter to transform a major world religion. If “nation-building” is a daunting task, “religion-building” is immeasurably more perilous and complex. Islam is neither a homogeneous entity nor a simple system. Many extraneous issues and problems have become entangled with religion, and many of the political actors in the region deliberately seek to “Islamize” the debate in a way that they think will further their goals.
Before we explore RAND’s strategic ‘roadmap to moderate network building’, it is important to first understand the different terminologies used by RAND to identify different categories of contemporary Islam. RAND takes careful considerations into defining the identities of Muslims to "develop a distinct identifiers to like-minded others-a kind of 'passport'". In order to distinguish an ‘enemy’ from potential partners of US-network building, RAND has carefully drawn sort of a guide of defining each categories of Muslim groups based on their positions on key issues. Muslims are characterized into various groups and subgroups according to their positions mainly on democracy and human rights, polygamy, criminal punishments, Islamic justice, minorities, women’s dress, and the permission of husbands to beat wives. The book ‘Civil Democratic Islam’ written by Cheryl Benard, summarizes the key points that identifies different types of Muslims. It serves as a guide towards understanding the di
Although there are many subcategories in each group, Muslims are categorized by RAND into four main groups; fundamentalists, traditionalists, modernists, and secularists.
- Fundamentalists reject democratic values and contemporary Western culture. They want an authoritarian, puritanical state that will implement their 'extreme' view of Islamic law and morality. They are willing to use innovation and modern technology to achieve that goal.
- Traditionalists want a conservative society. They are suspicious of modernity, innovation, and change.
- Modernists want the Islamic world to become part of global modernity. They want to modernize and reform Islam to bring it into line with the age.
- Secularists want the Islamic world to accept a division of church and state in the manner of Western industrial democracies, with religion relegated to the private sphere.
Fundamentalists and Islamists
RAND describes fundamentalists as "being hostile to the West and USA in particular and very damaging to democratic modernity". They reject nationalism and strongly believe in the concept of an Ummah. "Nationalism may be a step on the path but is not the main goal". Fundamentalists are further categorized into Radical fundamentalists and scriptural fundamentalists. Radical fundamentalists are those who regard democracy as a "wrongful creed and the sovereignty and the right to legislate belongs to God alone". They are "less concerned about the literal substance of Islam". Examples of this group, as described by RAND, include Al-Qaeda, The Taliban, Hizbut-Tahrir, HAMAS, as well as a large number of ‘radical’ movements worldwide. It is important to note that not all fundamentalists endorse terrorism. Some fundamentalists make use of democracy to their benefit. Although the Muslim Brotherhood's policies are non-violent, it is described by RAND as a "gateway" to radical ideologies. The second group, the scriptural fundamentalists, are more concerned with scriptural roots of theology such as the Wahhabis and Salafis. Islamists, on the other hand, are simply Muslim individuals/organizations with a political agenda regardless of their school of thought.
Traditionalists
The traditionalists are also distinguished into three main types; conservative traditionalists, reformist traditionalists, and moderate traditionalists. Conservative traditionalists see a role for the state and political authorities in enforcing Islamic laws and tradition rigorously and literally. Their main effort is in gaining influence and control in the society, even when the government is not Islamic. Conservative traditionalists that have experience living in the West have a more modern views on some issues and are more linked to contextual discourse on issues of orthodoxy. Reformist traditionalists are open to the compromise and reinterpretations of the literal applications of orthodoxy. They are flexible yet they seek to conserve the spirit of the law. RAND describes Yussuf al-Qaradawi as a reformist traditionalist. Moderate traditionalists "incorporate elements of Sufism—the tradition of Islamic mysticism that stresses emotive and personal experiences of the divine—into their practice of Islam". Generally, traditionalists tend to be ecumenical by setting a good example and by persuasion, not by compulsion. "Because of their victimization by Salafis and Wahhabis, traditionalists and Sufis are natural allies of the West to the extent that common ground can be found with them."
Modernists and Secularists
The modernists are very open to reinterpretations of contemporary and orthodox understanding of Islam. "They believe that the stories of the prophets reflected eternal truths as well as historical circumstances that were appropriate to that time but are no longer valid". They believe in finding an “essential core”. My interpretation of what RAND refers to as an "essential core" is similar to the beliefs of scholars who seek to find a single, simplified objective ('maqasid') based on the seerah of the prophet. RAND believes that modernists "value individual conscience and a community based on social responsibility, equality, and freedom which are easily compatible with democratic norms". Modernists are also open to make changes and revisions even to basic laws and texts, on the basis of ‘faith-based objections’, and the ‘good of the community’. In the case of hijab, some modernists believe that in "places where hijab is not the majority dress, hijab does not accomplish the objective of hijab;" to avoid attracting special notice. Some modernists also believe that, "like the Old Testament, the Quran includes content no longer relevant today". There are only minor differences between modernists, moderate muslims, and liberal muslims such that they are almost identical in nature. Secularists are a more extreme version of modernists in that they believe in the separation of religion and state, also the Laicist model. A great example of a secular ideology is the Turkish Kemalist ideology.
The guidelines provided by RAND Corporation in defining Muslims are a simplistic and extreme generalization of the different sects that exist in Islam. They are, in most part, perceptually biased towards the Western idea of modernism in which a society can only be considered modern/moderate in the essence that it accepts Western liberal and democratic values.
