expectations based on quicksand

Submitted by Loots/ The Netherlands (Netherlands), Jul 29, 2011 at 09:09

Dear Daniel,

As much as I like many of your articles, I have to disagree with you on many others. Having worked for 25 years in the Middle East and Pakistan, I see a steady decline instead of improvement. That's why I am unable to share your optimism on the Arab revolution. The good thing is that, more people in Europe start to understand and comprehend that Islam is a threat for their way of life. I share your fear for civil revolt and public discontent with a ever more demanding Islamic population.

The current deadlock for any real peace solution between Israel and the world of Islam is the same deadlock as why these countries are not capable to enter the 21 Th century, and respect the most fundamental human rights. The Islamic perception of Israel is au fond no other than their world view, in its entirety. Islam is the superior religion and jihad is the way to Dar el Salaam. Consequentially, when Jihad is taken literally Islam is in war with all non muslims.

It is understood that not all Islamists actually believe this. However on August the 5 th 1990 ,45 Islamic states ,including Turkey, rejected the universal declaration of human rights. Their declaration states "The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration"(human rights declaration). In other words the basic human rights of Islam are superior, and supersede all other international laws related to human rights. The world population is therefore divided in Islam and non Islam. This it is an indirect declaration of war to the rest of the world, while still having a vote in the UN, the security counsel and all international bodies.

Sharia one way or another is dominant in the Arab world and most dysfunctional Islamic countries. It is shown over the years by polls in many of these countries, that the majority of the population do believe that Islam is superior and Sharia is the only acceptable law. The often heard argument, that lack of education poverty and indoctrination, are the cause for these distorted world views, are only partially true. All 9-11 terrorist had a higher education, but were attracted to extreme Islamic interpretations of the Koran and Hadith . Recent polls in the Arab world and among the Palestinians show, that most Arabs do long for peace and prosperity, but when confronted with direct question, related to the Koran and how to behave to Jews and other infidels, the reactions are for more than 70% violently negative. In all my discussions over the last couple of years in the ME I see the same results. Mind you the people I talk to are in general intellectuals, politicians and academics.

In order to touch the essence of this pathology, we have to condense the Koran for where it stands for. The Jihad for Dar el Salaam is the casus belli for war . This might be a paradox for us, however not in the world of Islam, and certainly not in Wahhabism.

Benign but paradoxical is the Christian doctrine as well. The difference, however between the war for Dar el Salaam and Hell for all non Christian infidels is the islamist's obligation to fight, kill and bring people into submission, while Christians have the obligation to proselytize forgiveness.

The permanent violent battle for Dar el Salaam will not stop, as long as this doctrine is alive. It will cause poverty, illiterates, suppression, female suppression, rape, inequality and violence. A self fulfilling prophecy with permanent breeding grounds for future wars.

A moderate solution does not seems to be possible if the fundamentals are not changed. If so It would have been long ago. That is why I am unable to share your American optimism. It is based on quicksand.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".