 |
Michael Anbar , PhD, is a professor in the School of Medicine at the University of Buffalo. Formerly a professor at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, he is the author of , published by iUniverse.
|
|
|
|
By Michael Anbar
March 14, 2003
Arab terrorism, shown in all its brutality in the 9-11 atrocity, has been used for the last hundred years as a violent tool in the Muslim assault on Western culture and its ethical values. Most of these values stem from Judaism. Terrorism has been used against the Jews in the Land of Israel because the Jewish people symbolize for Muslims the quintessential "evils" of Western culture that "invaded" the "Arab domain." The underlying cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict is not a territorial dispute or fulfillment of political aspirations of local Arabs. The true cause is the tremendous difference between the ethical value systems of Arabs and Jews that impedes a long-term political settlement of the conflict.
Can the Jewish culture, which lies at the foundations of Western civilization, and the Arab Muslim culture coexist within the boundaries of the ancient Jewish homeland, in the narrow strip of land between the River Jordan and the sea? These two cultures are not just different -- they are diametrically opposed. Let us compare on several dimensions the behavior of Jews and Muslims currently adhering to the ethical value systems of their respective cultures. Each of these dimensions has an effect on the conflict and its potential resolution.
1. Judaism requires maintenance of the faith of the Jews, but there is no effort to convert others. Judaism recognizes that different peoples have different deities and religions. Although traditional Jews expect that all people will at the End of Days recognize the God of Israel as the universal god, already biblical Judaism gave equal legal rights to resident aliens who worship other deities. Also the State of Israel does not discriminate any citizen because of religion or ethnicity.
Contemporary fundamental Islam, on the other hand, does not fully tolerate anyone who worships another deity. Non-Muslims cannot reside, not speaking of become citizens, in traditional Islamic countries, such as Saudi Arabia. While Muslims may tolerate subjugated Jews and Christians (known as Dhimis), worshippers of other religions, such as Buddhists, do not enjoy even that limited level of tolerance.
The Arab intolerance of non-Muslim translates into political reality. For instance, there are those who advocate the "transfer" of Jews from Hebron as part of a peace deal with the Arabs. But if and when Hebron would be under Arab sovereignty, as part of a political settlement, why should Jews who reside in Hebron on legally acquired property be prevented from continuing to live there, while the Arabs of Taibe, for example, continue to be citizens of the State of Israel? Why must the Islam-driven policy of Saudi Arabia, which prohibits residency of any non-Muslims, be adopted by the proposed new Arab state west of the Jordan?
2. Jews typically celebrate life and try to preserve it as far as possible. Premature death is viewed as God's punishment that can be averted by good deeds and repentance. Afterlife had no role in biblical Judaism; also in Rabbinic Judaism its conceptual role is minimal. Jews do not dream of paradise nor do they spend time worrying about hell.
In contrast, death in Islam is accepted fatalistically as a transition to bliss or to eternal suffering. If paradise is guaranteed, as it is to a shahid (a Muslim martyr who kills infidels), death calls for celebration, as witnessed in Muslim families of dead terrorists in the "disputed territories." Obviously, this fundamental Islamic tenet sanctifies aggression and glorifies violence.
3. Typical of the Qur'anic tradition is the authoritarian image of the Prophet. Mohammad is a model of a totalitarian ruler, a model that has been emulated by Muslim despots throughout Islamic history. Also secular Islamic dictators, such as Saddam Hussein or Yassir Arafat, have emulated this model because the masses have been educated to accept despotism as ordained by God.
In contrast, History tells us that the Jewish monarchy was probably the first known constitutional monarchy in human history -- the Jewish kings never had absolute power, unlike the kings of the surrounding empires - Assyria, Babylon, Egypt and Persia. Jewish constitutional monarchy, starting with King David, evolved centuries before the development of classical Athenian democracy in Greece
4. One reads in the Qur'an that Mohammad has violated numerous ethical rules of his society -- actually rules of any civilized society - violating treaties, deceit, treachery, rape, child abuse, looting, indiscriminate murders and cruel torture of infidels, all in the name of God. Since Mohammad has been the model for every devout Muslim leader, his unethical behavior has been used as a license for similar behavior up to date. This precept has a critical political ramification: It casts serious doubt on the validity of any treaty between Muslim Arabs and Jews. Muslims can abrogate any such treaty if they assume that it was not in good faith. Arafat has used this tenet as an excuse to violate the Oslo accords and bragged about this.
In contrast, the God of the Jewish people always punished Jewish biblical personalities who behaved unethically. Morality is ingrained in Judaism; it obliges everyone -- peasant or king alike. Consequently, Jews detest dictators who typically ignore the law of the land. Moreover, Judaism expects the clergy and leadership to be models of ethical behavior.
Islamic tradition of unethical behavior, at least toward non-Muslims, implies that a Western style egalitarian democracy, envisioned by President Bush, is incompatible with traditional Islam.
5. Traditional Muslims believe that they are superior to all other people. Islam's concept of supermen, i.e., member of the Islamic Umma, is inherent in its culture. The same concept became a fundamental premise of the Nazi ideology. For the Nazis the criterion of elitism was the imaginary supremacy of the Germanic super-race, while for Muslims it is the belief in the supremacy of believers in Mohammad and his prophecy. The corollary of this Islamic ideology is an absolute despise of all non-Muslim people.
In contrast, traditional Jews believe that the Jewish people were chosen by God to serve him not because Jews are superior to other peoples. Judaism accepts the superiority of other people in any respect, except for the special tie between Jews and their God.
6. Peace among nations is an ideal in Jewish ethics. Conquering all non-Muslim nations and converting them to Islam is the Islamic ideal.
Can people with such disparate cultures, with such incongruent ethical value systems, live in peace and harmony on a small piece of land west of the River Jordan? The answer is NO. While we witness some assimilation in the Land of Israel where some Muslim Arabs adopt the Western ethics, and there is a similar pattern among some Muslims in Western countries, there has been an ominous upsurge of fundamental Islam sponsored by the powerful Wahabists of Saudi Arabia.
The PLO that started as a secular political movement, emulating Communist "national liberation" revolutionaries, has dramatically changed under the influence of Islamism and Saudi funding. Recruiting, training, equipping and then glorifying suicidal terrorists is just one manifestation of this change. Far more ominous is the PLO-sponsored education of young children to hate Jews, Americans and whatever they stand for -- mass-producing a generation of Islam-driven killers. The PA has converted the territories under its control since the Oslo agreement into a militant Wahabist political entity bound to spread Islamic domination by violence. This is evident in the vitriolic sermons in Arab mosques.
President Bush's vision of a new Arab democracy west of the River Jordan implies a secular Western-like democracy and not a theocratic "democracy" like that in Iran. He definitely does not have in mind a militant despotic "democracy" a-la Iraq. The first station on "the roadmap to peace" must be, therefore, the de-Wahabization of the Arab population involved, similar to the de-Nazification of the Germans after WWII.
De-Wahabization will not be as easy as de-Nazification; Hitler had less than 10 years to build up his Hitler-Jugend, whereas Arafat had more time to build up his hate brigades of youngsters with full cooperation of the Muslim clergy. Moreover, Hitler's nationalism stayed within most of the ethical boundaries of Western culture - to murder Jews, Hitler had to dehumanize them first and then he kept the Auschwitz atrocities a secret. Arafat and his fanatic followers have no such ethical constraints -- Jews and other infidels are to be killed because Islam mandates this, and the Arabs brag gleefully about their inhumane "successes." The very last thing the West needs at this point in time is the establishment of another Wahabist state west of the River Jordan with Islamic ethical values, bound on religion-driven militancy. It will be a source of mortal danger not only for Israel but also for the rest of the world. President Bush is certainly aware of this.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
