The remains from the grave of a Sufi saint has been removed from this mosque
Battlelines draw for fight over Libyan Islam
By Christian Lowe
(Reuters)
- When night falls on the street outside Tripoli 's
Abdullah Eshaab mosque, theological discussions often break out. Lately, they
have taken place at the point of a gun. On three occasions this month, groups
of ultra-purist Islamists have turned up at the mosque gates after dark, armed
with Kalashnikov rifles, 106-mm anti-tank cannon and truck-mounted Grad
rockets, according to a cleric at the mosque.
They want to demolish the tomb, inside the mosque, of
Suleiman Al-Feituri, a 12th-century holy man, because they consider such tombs
as idolatry.
Facing off against them are the mosque's own, more moderate
worshippers backed up by a militia unit armed with automatic weapons and two
pickup trucks with anti-aircraft guns mounted on the back.
"So far we've been trying to negotiate with them but if
it does not work we will use force," said Omar Hajaj, a 30-year-old
businessman who is also assistant to the cleric in charge of the mosque.
"They are a bunch of extremists who do not want this
country to settle down," he said, as the mosque's security detail stood
outside with the safety catch off on their weapons. "We warn everyone of
the danger of these people."
Freed from Muammar Gaddafi's repressive 42-year rule,
Libyans are now considering what kind of Islam they want and how big a role it
should play in their everyday lives.
The process has turned into a contest between mainstream
Muslims, on the one hand, and on the other, Islamists who follow a stricter
interpretation of the faith and believe it should inform society's rules and
government policy.
There's a huge amount at stake. Both sides have large
quantities of weapons, and the outcome could also determine who ends up with
political power in the new Libya.
So far the Islamists -- who are better organized and offer
an ideology that appeals to the young and disenchanted -- are the ones filling
the vacuum left by Gaddafi's fall.
"It is the law of physics," said Salah Ingab, a
Libyan writer on Islam who is concerned about the rise of the Islamists.
"An area of low pressure is filled from an area of high pressure. This is
what is happening with Libya ."
BURQAS AND BEARDS
The resurgence of Islamist ideas has become a feature of the
"Arab Spring" uprisings across the region. In Tunisia,
a moderate Islamist party now leads a coalition government.
In Libya
too, Islamists have made their mark on the political landscape now taking
shape.
Abdel Hakim Belhadj, a former Islamist militant who spent
time with the Taliban in Afghanistan but now says he has
renounced violence, heads one of the country's most powerful militias.
Mustafa Abdel Jalil, the head of the National Transitional
Council, Libya 's
caretaker leadership, has said he wants the new order to be based on Islamic
sharia law and that a ban on polygamy will be lifted.
The Islamists' political role is in flux. In a caretaker
cabinet announced last week, there was only one minister, for religion, who is
an acknowledged Islamist. The full extent of their influence may not become
clear until an election is
held, probably around the middle of next year.
But on the streets and in the mosques, there is no doubt
that more hardline brands of Islam are gaining strength.
Men with long beards and white robes -- the trademark dress
of Salafists, followers of a purist interpretation of Islam -- can now be seen
on the streets.
Under Gaddafi, who waged a 15-year campaign to stamp out
Islamists who he thought were trying to overthrow him, those outfits would have
attracted the attention of domestic intelligence agents.
Many Salafists were jailed by Gaddafi and those not
imprisoned spent years avoiding any outward manifestation of their beliefs.
The majority of Libyan women have long worn the hijab, or
Islamic headscarf. Now some can be seen shopping at Tripoli markets in
the burqa, a head to toe covering that masks the face.
At Friday prayers last week at Al Nafathy mosque, which
until now has attracted followers of traditional, mainstream Islam, the sermon
was given by a new cleric, who spoke of the evil arising from the free mixing
of men and women in public, and railed against the spread of songs in general
and Western music in particular.
Both are themes favored by Salafists, but until now
unfamiliar to Libyans.
A meeting of senior Muslim clerics in a Tripoli
hotel this week adopted a recommendation that anyone who drinks alcohol should
be barred from senior government posts.
The sale of alcohol has been illegal in Libya
for decades, though it is available on the black market.
"If he repents, it's not a problem," for someone
to join the government, said one of the clerics.
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Many Libyans say the freedom to worship as they choose is
one of the benefits of the revolution.
"During Gaddafi's time, people who came to dawn prayers
were arrested," said a muezzin, who pronounces the call to prayer, at a
mosque in Tripoli 's old city.
"The police thought they were too religious and people
were afraid to come, they were tortured. All the religious people were afraid
to come to the mosque," said the man, who did not want to give his name.
"Now more people are coming. There is complete
freedom."
For many, the new piety takes some getting used to.
"Many are dressed like people from Kandahar ,"
he said, referring to the Afghan city where the extremist influence of the
Taliban is strong.
Some people are sanguine.
"I am not afraid of Islamists in Libya .
This is a moderate country and even if there is a small element of radicals,
they won't be able to push their way through," said Houda, a 21-year-old engineering student.
"Abdel Jalil was wrong to talk about polygamy ... but
we see it as a mistake and we forgive him," she said.
Others are very worried.
Ingab, the writer on Islam, says he is a devout Muslim who
prays five times a day. But he says there is nothing in the Koran to say that woman
should wear veils or that governments should impose Islamic laws.
The ring tone on his mobile phone is a song by American
singer-songwriter Bob Dylan.
"My friend said to me: 'He is a Jew.' I said I don't
care. That is his problem. I do not care if he worships a cow. I love Bob
Dylan."
He pulls out a manuscript he wrote challenging the
Islamists' interpretation of the Koran.
"The time is not right to publish this because I will
be killed on sight," he said. "It contains loads of things they
disagree with. The Salafists are just ignorant people."
BODY MISSING
In the courtyard at Abdullah Eshaab mosque, Hajaj, the
deputy imam, gets out his laptop.
With the mosque's armed guards standing nearby, he scrolls
through photographs showing tombs that hardline Islamists have managed to
destroy.
Some Islamists believe that tombs are a corruption of
Islam's teachings because they turn graves into shrines and distract from the
worship of God.
One image showed a small building in Misrata, 200 km (125
miles) east of Tripoli , in ruins.
Hajaj said that was all that was left of the 400-year-old tomb of holy man Sidi
Hamed al-Bikr, after the attackers fired anti-tank guns at it.
In Derna, near Libya 's
border with Egypt ,
he said Salafists had demolished the tomb of Sidi Nasr Aziz. He was a sheikh,
or holy man, reputed to have been a companion of the Prophet Mohammed.
On the other side of Tripoli
were more wrecked tombs. Attackers broke into the Sidi Nasr mosque at night,
when no-one was there, said the head cleric there, Omran Ali Dayek.
They destroyed two tombs: one to a holy man who died in
around 1760, and another to a sheikh who died 15 years ago. They removed the
body from the more recent grave, and were about to dig up the second when they
were disturbed and fled.
"We went to all the graveyards in the area looking for
the body but we could not find it. His family came here crying, asking where
the body is," said Dayek.
In the room where the tombs used to be, there are fresh
concrete slabs where workers have covered up the graves.
Mosque-goers say the new authorities seem reluctant to take
on the radical Islamists.
They point across the road at the offices of the state oil
company, where a security camera points at the entrance of the mosque. They say
it must have recorded the attack, but that the oil company will not surrender
the tape.
"Lots of people have come here to ask questions and
take photographs, but nobody does anything," said Dayek.
Wherever Sharia law experiences a revival, tolerance
decreases, and harassment and violence increase.
As much as it is a frequent target, particularly of Salafist
Muslim movements, Sufism is not the peaceful alternative to violent jihad and
subjugation of non-Muslims that it is often advertised to be. Rather, its
adherents are persecuted as they are accused of being purveyors of innovations
(bida) over what Muhammad practiced and for their reverence for shrines and
graves of their forebears, denounced as idolatry (shirk).
A few months ago, how many supporters of the Libyan uprising
believed this couldn't happen there? We tried to tell you.
"Islamic hard-liners attack rival shrines in Libya ,"
by Kim Gamel for the Associated Press, October 13:
The vandalism has drawn concern at the highest levels as Libya 's
new rulers seek to reassure the international community that extremists will
not gain influence in the North African nation.
Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, head of the governing National
Transitional Council, reacted with alarm to reports that graves were being
desecrated and appealed to a top Muslim cleric, al-Sadek al-Gheriani, to issue
a fatwa, or religious ruling, on the issue.
He also called for restraint. "I ask those
destroying these mosques to stop doing that because this is not the time to do
that," Abdul-Jalil said Tuesday at a news conference. "What they
did is not on the side of the revolution."
The campaign appears to be aimed mainly at shrines revered
by Sufis, a mystical order whose members often pray over the tombs of revered
saints and ask for blessings or intervention to bring success, marriage or
other desired outcomes. Hard-line Sunnis deem the practice offensive because
they consider worshipping over graves to be idolatry.
In one case, witnesses said dozens of armed, bearded
men wearing military uniforms ransacked a Sufi shrine in Tripoli this
week, burning relics and carrying away the remains of two imams, or prayer
leaders, for reburial elsewhere.
The assailants arrived in pickup trucks mounted with heavy
weapons and stormed the gate to the compound housing the shrine, then dug up
the two imams, identified as Abdul-Rahman al-Masri and Salem Abu Seif, and took
the remains to be buried in a cemetery, according to the witnesses.
Many residents in the Al-Masri neighborhood welcomed the
attack, accusing worshippers at the shrine of practicing "black
magic." Sufism is a mystical tradition in Islam. The order says its
mission is to live a simple life of contemplation and prayer but followers are
frequently targeted by extremists.
Witnesses offered conflicting details, with some saying the
attackers were heavily armed and came from other parts of the city and others
saying it was a small group of unarmed locals.
Abdul-Hamid al-Sunni, one of the residents, said the
presence of the bodies had prevented people from the neighborhood from praying
there. He claimed it was a small group of some 20 people that exhumed the
bodies.
He said residents had long wanted to get rid of the graves
and he presented a petition signed by 120 people supporting the action, which
began about 11 p.m. Sunday.
Dirt and rocks were piled high around the empty graves that
had been dug in the floor of the white and light blue building in Tripoli 's
al-Masri neighborhood. Blackened piles of ash and pieces of pottery were in the
courtyard outside after the attackers burned relics and other items from the
shrine, which sits next to a Quranic school in the same compound.
"We need to build a new school here, a Quranic school,
and we need to build a mosque and we need to build a small hospital for the
area," al-Sunni said....
Islamic conquest in a nutshell: "Unfortunately there is
one thing standing between me and that property: the rightful owners."
- Hedy Headley Lamarr,Blazing Saddles
Posted by Marisol on October 13, 2011 7:54
...............................
Because nothing says freedom and democracy like *desecrating
graves*. sarc/off
More:
He also called for restraint. "I ask those destroying
these mosques to stop doing that because this is not the time to do that,"
Abdul-Jalil said Tuesday at a news conference. "What they did is not on
the side of the revolution."
...............................
...............................
Ah—the Muslim world, where the "moderates" are the
ones saying it is 'not yet time' to impose Hudud laws, or massacre non-Muslim
minorities, or desecrate the dead...
God, I hate Islam.
They need to build a mosque. Right on the same site.
And it will function as an embassy, like the others.
Islamic culture and nationalism at work.
Sufism is not the peaceful alternative
I think that much of the confusion in the West regarding the
"peacefulness" of Sufism is due to the exposure to groups such as Pir
Vilayat Inayat Khan's "Universal Sufism", a sub-branch of the Indian
Chishti Order.
This group was very appealing to ex-hippie/ex-freaks in the
1960s - 1980s. But the religion was syncretistic and heavily saturated with
Eastern Mysticism, including Hindu and Buddhist practices.
I was involved in some Sufi study, meditation and dance
groups when I was younger. They were independent groups led by current and
former members of this Sufi order.
I met a lot of very nice, certainly peaceful Sufis that I
considered my friends. To this day, I hold absolutely nothing against them. But
they had very little in common with other "genuine/traditional"
Muslims.
The groups did NOT study the Q'uran, but rather the works of
some Sufis of their order such as Vilayat Khan, or other famous Sufi Mystics
such as Rumi.
I don't remember the others, but Samuel Lewis was highly
admired. "Sufi Sam" was not only considered a Sufi Master, but also
was Jewish and it was claimed he was a Kabalist and Hassidic Master. I have
some doubts about the latter but the fact that the Sufis were proud to claim
this was a pretty good tipoff that these weren't traditional Muslims!
The only reference to the Q'uran during my attendance was
just for use of meditation. i.e. repetition of the Arabic words for the
attributes of Allah, or repetition of the first part of the Shahada -- "La
'ilaha 'illallah","There is no God but Allah". (Interestingly,
we did not repeat the part about Mohammad being Allah's prophet -- another
tipoff!) There were some specific verses from the Q'uran, although I don't
recall which ones, and they were simply repeated in Arabic as meditation
devices.
I think to most of us, the Arabic words could just have well
been Hindu or Buddhist mantras, and they were certainly being used that way by
the Sufis.
Traditionally such Sufis have been denounced (correctly) as
heretics and (tragically) persecuted in traditional Muslim countries.
Certainly some of the western practitioners of Sufism have
virtually nothing in common with the body of Islam, and should not really be
pointed to as examples of "peaceful/moderate" Islam.
As Abe said: A house divided against itself can not stand.
I would say that Islam's house isn't just divided, it's in
splinters. Let's hope they destroy each other.
Clowns!
"He also called for restraint. "I ask those
destroying these mosques to stop doing that because this is not the time to do
that," Abdul-Jalil said Tuesday at a news conference."
Hey Abjul-Jalil....until you are completely brain dead you can never be Muslim enough...
Sufis can be Sunni or Shia. They can be Meccan Muslims or
they can be Medinan Muslims like the Deobandis in Pakistan
or the Muslims of the Americas
who revere Sheik Gilani and practice all the types of jihad, including theft
and violence.
Sufis can be duped Western kafirs who dance and chant,
believing their ecstatic state is a 'higher' consciousness and will bring them
enlightenment. I also knew many of these faux Sufis who thought they had found
the secrets of the universe via their Sufi 'masters.'
In the end, a line in the sand is drawn and the Sufis have
to accept the Koran as Allah's words, Mohammed as his messenger and sharia as
their law. And there is no room in this line for the worship of saints or love
for all humanity.
Well, so much for the discipline and unity of Islam, and its
bringing "dignity" to its followers. I said it before, and will say
it again, that even though I think that Moammar Qaddafi's only redeeming
quality is that he looks like he might be the natural son of either Chico or
Harpo Marx, his opponents are just the same kind of dreary thugs, and the USA
simply doesn't have a dog in the Libyan fight.
People have said that Rauf and the mosque he was attatched
to was sufi. So what has Imam Rauf said about this?
Nothing.
That's because he is only masquerading as sufi.
Have other sufi imams publicly blamed America
for 9/11 and called for the US
to engage with Hamas and Hizbollah?
Hellz no they haven't.
Only him.
He ain't no sufi.
If this what they do to other Muslims, imagine what they
will do to us.
"He also called for restraint. "I ask those
destroying these mosques to stop doing that because this is not the time to do
that," Abdul-Jalil said Tuesday at a news conference. "What they did
is not on the side of the revolution."
this isn't the time, you idiots! later, when no one is
watching...
Steven
The point about Sufis being syncretistic is only partly
true, but as the poetess points out, @ the end of the day, they have to
acknowledge the supremacy of the Qur'an and Mohammed as the last messenger of
allah. And they don't exactly worship their saints, thereby remaining compliant
to that Muslim directive.
Besides, as has been pointed out often in the past, being
Sufi does not imply being tolerant. The 14th century Turkic conqueror
Timur/Tamerlane was a Sufi, and his two-fold mission was to conquer huge areas
of the world - he covered Russia to Baghdad to Delhi - and slaughter as many
Infidels as he could, which he enthusiatically did in Armenia and Delhi. Fast
forwarding to today, both the Kashmiri and Chechen Jihadi movements are Sufi
movements. Another thing, as Greg Davis, former Jihadwatch contributor once
pointed out, only 2% of the world's Muslims are Sufis, so those who use them as
examples of what Muslims are or can be are really missing the point.
Imo, the biggest problems of Sufi philosophy is to draw a
moral equivalence b/w legitimate religions, be they Christianity, Buddhism,
Judaism, Hinduism or Zoroastrianism, and Islam. In other words, if someone is
practicing any of the other religions, Sufi philosophers try and attract them
to Sufism, like there was something wrong w/ what they were
originally practising. Such a message doesn't, however, go out to orthodox
Muslims, so that @ the end, the effect of Sufi proselytizing, be they thru
their qawali or dance practices, is that the number of Muslims go up, and the
number of Infidels down, which in Islamic terms is seen as a shot in the arm
for Islam.
So essentially, I see the above story as a continuation of
the Alien vs Predator trend in dar ul Islam. I do regret that Gadaffi is not in
power, not b'cos of what Kepha wrote above, but rather, b'cos the civil war in
Libya is almost @ an end, which is undesirable. Had Gadaffi still been in
power, the civil war there would have continued indefinitely. Same goes for
Egypt - Muslims vs Copts ain't good, but a full blown civil war b/w 2 major
groups of Muslims would be. Similarly, I hope Assad lasts, since the number of
Sunnis in Syria is too overwhelming even for Hizbullah.
One more question to Mustafa Abdul-Jalil - When is
the right time to do that? ;-)
I'm just an ordinary guy, poetess. I stand on your side of
that line that theo drew in that sand.
Salafi Violence in Libya
Founder and Managing Director, North Africa
Risk Consulting, Inc.
The news that US
Ambassador Christopher Stevens died during an assault on the US Consulate in Benghazi
came as a shock. Although there was already increasing awareness of radical
Islamist sentiments in eastern Libya ,
and in fact throughout the country, their full extent and their threshold for
violence were unknown. Even so, it may have been only a matter of time before
the mix of radical Islamists and abundantly available weaponry in Libya
catalyzed into catastrophic violence.
Apart from some very crude accounts of what sparked protests
outside the consulate and the eventual assault on the building, it is not
entirely clear what transpired in Benghazi .
Nonetheless, the Libyan government's inability to curtail violence in the
country has long been a concern, whether it was the ineffectual approach of the
National Transitional Council (NTC) or infighting among the security services
under the General National Congress (GNC) that have undermined any effort to
establish law and order.
Several weeks ago, in a piece posted on the Arabist, I categorized violence in Libya
and suggested ways in which it might be mutating. The takeaway from that piece
was that there is a new strain of terrorism in Libya
that is growing increasingly dangerous.
Briefly, there is a superabundance of violence in Libya .
There are tribal skirmishes -- usually instigated by a desire to settle
vendettas or to control parts of the black market economy. There has been a
steady wave of assassinations of former Gaddafi intelligence officials in Benghazi ,
carried out by unknown groups. In late August, three car bombings that were
allegedly perpetrated by Gaddafi loyalists rocked Tripoli .
And there has been Islamist violence, especially in Benghazi ,
which served as ample warning for what transpired on 11 September 2012 . In June an IED was thrown at
the US Consulate in Benghazi and
the UK
Ambassador's convoy was attacked with RPGs, wounding two of his bodyguards. The
Tunisian Consulate in Benghazi was
ransacked in protest over a controversial art exhibit in Tunisia .
Several car bombs have been detonated, targeting key Libyan government
buildings. More recently, Salafist groups have destroyed Sufi shrines
throughout the country, sparking outrage and dismay but no forceful government
reaction and leading some skeptical Libyans to think that elements of the
Libyan government were in cahoots with Salafists or at least sympathetic to
them.
In the early days of the revolution in Libya ,
there were questions about whether al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), an
al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group, would take advantage of the lawlessness in
Libya . At the
time, I argued that it was unlikely that AQIM would decamp from northwestern Mali
to Libya , but
instead it was likely that new radical Salafi groups would emerge in Libya .
It now appears that there are at least two radical Salafi groups, if not more,
that are either avowed allies of al-Qaeda or at least share al-Qaeda's salafi
jihadi ideology. The first, which carried out the attack on the US
consulate in June, was called the Brigade for the Release of the Imprisoned
Sheikh Omar Abdulrahman, named after the alleged mastermind of the 1993 World
Trade Center
bombings. The second group is Ansar al-Sharia, the Victors of Sharia.
The counterterrorism challenge in Libya
is enormous. There is no shortage of weaponry in Libya ,
but there is an enormous deficit of state capacity. The Libyan government is
trying hard to keep the political process moving forward, electing a congress
and president, but it has done so at the expense of a deteriorating security
environment. The gamble for the Libyans was that they would get their political
house in order before the security environment became too difficult to contain.
The government has lost that bet. Now it must deal with the consequences of
having allowed the security situation to become so bad as to lead to the death
of the US
ambassador, the very country that helped the Libyan overthrow the brutal rule
of Muammar Gadaffi.
I had the good opportunity to brief Ambassador Stevens in
the spring of 2012 before he assumed his post in Libya .
He was affable and insightful, with deep and genuine empathy for the challenges
facing Libyans and Middle Easterners more broadly. He was just the kind of man
that any country would have wanted to represent its interests overseas and the US
was lucky to have him. I am sure that many of us in the community feel the same
way. He will be sorely missed.
Radicals who were
kept at bay or in prison under dictators such as Gaddafi and Mubarak are now
free to pursue their agendas
If Muammar Gaddafi were still alive, he might give a bitter
laugh at the news that the US
ambassador to Libya has been killed in Benghazi .
Hosni Mubarak, in his prison hospital, would growl a wry "I told you
so" after the attack on the fortress-like American embassy in Cairo .
Two onslaughts in two of the cities that witnessed the
historic drama of the Arab spring last year do not an Islamist winter make. But
both underline the glowering and dangerous presence of the sort of radical
Muslim fundamentalists whom the old regimes kept at bay and are now free to
pursue their agendas. Gaddafi and Mubarak may have been unreconstructed
dictators but, by and large, they did Washington 's
bidding while presenting themselves as the guardians of stability. And US
diplomats were usually safe.
Conspiracy theories are common in the Middle East ,
but it was surely no coincidence that these incidents took place on 11
September – a date that will be associated with the notion of an inevitable
"clash of civilizations" long after the death of Osama bin Laden and
demise of George W Bush.
In Cairo , much
was made of the role of the brother of Ayman al-Zawahiri, Bin Laden's Egyptian
successor, and of the black Salafi flags carried by demonstrators. Still, the
target was a crude and poisonously anti-Muslim film made in the US
and circulated on YouTube, aided by the notorious Pastor Terry Jones – evidence
of American arrogance and prejudice rather than anything directly political.
Barack Obama faced criticism for backing Mubarak until the
end, but the US
supports Cairo 's new regime – now
led by Mohamed Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood. Libyans know the US
backed last year's UN resolution that led to a no-fly zone, Nato intervention
and Gaddafi's downfall. Salafi groups in Tunisia ,
a thorn in the side of its Muslim Brotherhood government, also called for
anti-US protests. (Salafis, like Islamists, come in different shapes: all are
socially conservative but not all condone violence.)
Islam is by definition wider
than any national issue and this violence highlights the uncomfortable truth
that the US
remains deeply unpopular across the Muslim world, where Iraq ,
Afghanistan
and, above all, the enduring Israeli-Palestinian conflict remain open sores.
But religion and politics make for a toxic combination.
"The US
has killed hundreds of thousands of unnamed Muslims in 9/11 revenge wars,"
commented the Palestinian activist Ali Abunimah. "Media dehumanisation
helps make this possible."
Coming amid the US
presidential campaign, the attacks are likely to curb what enthusiasm remains
for US activism
in the Arab world as the fear of Islamist chaos overwhelms hope for the
springtime of Arab democracy. Syrians hoping that the US
will back Libyan-style intervention or arm the rebels will be disappointed.
Others pray that the influence of Saudi-financed Salafis will be limited.
Arab governments want to get on well with Washington
but their relationships will always be vulnerable to provocations by extremists
on both sides. For too many across the region, the Florida
pastor Jones looks more influential than Obama.
ANALYSIS
AIR DATE: Sept. 12, 2012
Libyan Salafists
Assert Power with Embassy Attacks, Hoping to Catch Public Eye
SUMMARY
Since Libya
established a secular democracy, conservative Muslims in Libya
known as Salafists have felt disenfranchised. Gwen Ifil speaks to Frederic
Wehrey of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and journalist Robin
Wright about the link between Salafi Muslims and the latest attacks in the Middle
East .
GWEN IFILL: For more on the developments of the last 24
hours, I'm joined now by two people with deep experience in Libya .
Robin Wright is a journalist and author who knew Ambassador
Stevens personally and has reported extensively from Libya
and the wider Middle East .
And Frederic Wehrey is a senior associate with the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace. Robin Wright, tell us about Ambassador
Stevens.
ROBIN WRIGHT, journalist: Chris was an extraordinary envoy,
in that he understood the streets as well as the elites. He spoke the language.
He understood the culture. And he had seen Libya
through -- all through three of its phases. He spent two years as the number
two during Moammar Gadhafi's rule at the American Embassy. And then he was --
he spent a year during the transition as the liaison to the Transitional
National Council in Libya
based in Benghazi .
Slain U.S. Ambassador Was 'Excited to Return to Libya '
And then he returned to establish the American Embassy in
the post-Gadhafi era. And he really was tremendously thoughtful.
He was willing to get out, even facing the extraordinary
dangers of a country with 300 militias, going through a fragile transition, and
trying to kind of change a country that had been the nemesis for the United
States for 40 years into an ally.
GWEN IFILL: Frederic Wehrey, based on your experience
on the ground in Libya
and in Benghazi in particular, did
any of this surprise you? Did it seem unusual? The latest reports we're hearing
is that this attack was actually planned.
FREDERIC WEHREY, Carnegie Endowment For International Peace:
Tragically, I think there were a lot of indicators that this was coming. What
you had was, since the July 7 elections in Libya ,
security really declined, especially in Benghazi .
And this was really unnoticed by a lot of Western press. You had almost daily
incidents of car bombings, attacks on Gadhafi officials, rocket attacks on
Western icons like the Red Cross, and in May, an attack on a consulate in Benghazi .
So, this wasn't the first of its kind. This is really a problem of the weakness
of the government and the weakness of the police forces throughout the country.
GWEN IFILL: But one of the things we have been hearing, to
the extent we have been hearing anything from Libya ,
is how welcoming Libyans were and how -- even Ambassador Stevens had been
quoted saying how much better things had gotten. Was he misguided, or were we?
ROBIN WRIGHT: Well, I think the majority of Libyans are
overwhelmingly welcoming of the United States
and the role of NATO in facilitating the transition to post-Gadhafi rule. But
as you saw in Egypt as well, there are a small group of extremists,
hard-liners, ultra-conservatives of different ilks who are sensitive about the
role of the United States, in the case of Egypt inflamed by a film about the
Prophet Mohammad, that play into passions. It may also be that you have an
al-Qaida affiliate involved in some way in the Libyan attack. We don't know,
but there are early indications that what happened in Benghazi
and in Cairo may actually have
slightly different causes.
GWEN IFILL: There may have been a retaliatory effect,
we think, perhaps. There are so many versions of what may have been the spark.
FREDERIC WEHREY: Absolutely. And I think -- just to
echo, I think Libyans, culturally, temperamentally, historically, are not
predisposed to support this sort of violent radical Islamism that is motivating
these attacks. In many of the previous instances of violence, you have seen
Libyans mobilize in protests or on social media against the violence. And, as
Robin mentioned, this is a country that is still very grateful to the West for
the intervention that toppled Gadhafi.
GWEN IFILL: What do we know, Robin, about this video, this
film, whatever, however you choose to describe it, that was posted some time
ago online and suddenly caught fire this week?
ROBIN WRIGHT: Very little. There have been different reports
in the first 24 hours about who may have been behind it different sources,
people from different parts of the world, different religions. And it's kind of
dangerous to get into that turf until we really know more about where it came
from. But it did portray, an excerpt from it that was put on YouTube, actions
by the Prophet Mohammad that people in the region felt were sensitive, in the
same way that people of other -- Christians might feel about the portrayal of
Jesus in -- controversial. This is a sensitive issue for people of all faiths.
And Muslims at this particular juncture, so sensitive about the roles and tensions
of the outside world in countries as they are reclaiming control of their own
faith -- and fate, political fate, you know, can trigger exceptional or
extraordinary responses, but, again, by a tiny minority.
When you look at Egypt ,
2,000 people in a country with 85 million people, that's almost
infinitesimally, but it happened on 9/11 and it was something that echoed the
takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Iran
in 1979. So, it clearly inflames us as well. And it's -- the tragedy is that
this is a very small minority of people I think in both countries.
GWEN IFILL: Tell me about the Salafi Muslims. What role do
we think they may have played? They have been stirring up some of this?
FREDERIC WEHREY: Well, they have certainly been behind a lot
of the attacks in Libya
against Sufism, which is a variant of Islam that they regard as heretical.
They have attacked other Western targets. My reading of the
Salafis in Libya
is that they're such a marginal minority, and Libyans are really predisposed to
a more moderate interpretation -- and we saw this in the elections -- that the
Salafis are grasping at relevance and they're trying to rattle their sabers.
They're trying to muscle their way to prominence through this violence. And
this is not the strategy of a movement that has grassroots support or a winning
movement. So again they're a fringe movement. That said, they can still cause
violence. They can still play a spoiler role. And, importantly, they're
highlighting the weakness of the government. And what you're seeing is a lot of
Libyans, they're mad at the Salafis for this attack and for other violence, but
they're turning their anger toward the government and they're saying, why
aren't you providing security?
GWEN IFILL: One of the interesting things is the difference
between the reaction in Egypt
and the reaction in Libya .
The Libyan government came out. We heard the prime minister denounce this, the U.S.
ambassador from Libya
to the U.S.
also denouncing it. We haven't gotten the same response in Egypt
for the breach of the U.S. Embassy there.
ROBIN WRIGHT: Yes, it was very striking, the different
responses in Tripoli and in Cairo .
And I think that was a subtheme of the remarks by both the secretary of state
and the president today, acknowledging the immediate and heavy-hearted response
by the Libyan government, the role that the Libyan security forces played in
trying to fight back those who were mobbing the consulate in Benghazi, and then
trying to save Ambassador Stevens and his colleagues. And by the absence of
words about Egypt ,
it was almost as if saying, and where were you?
And I think this is a tragic moment, the timing of this, not
just because of 9/11, but also because both of these countries need U.S. ,
in the case of Libya ,
technological help, and Egypt
financial help to deal with the issues that triggered the uprisings in the
first place.
And you just had 100 top-level executives from American
corporations in Cairo to talk about
private investment, helping create jobs, which is what really is so critical in
stabilization. And these kinds of attacks in Cairo
and Benghazi undermine American
faith, business or diplomatic, in the future of these countries.
GWEN IFILL: I think most Americans looked back at the
Arab spring and think, good, done, that's all taken care of. But, instead, I
wonder if both of these events happening within 24 hours in two different
capitals should be sending us some sort of warning signal, something that the U.S.
should be aware of, on alert for.
FREDERIC WEHREY: Well, certainly, I think it's an indication
that revolutions are a long-term process, and the initial victors can sometimes
lose out to more radical actors.
And I think, importantly, the international community
shouldn't disengage from these countries, and especially in Libya .
The country is grateful for our assistance, but they also need more assistance
in building representative institutions and especially building their security
forces.
ROBIN WRIGHT: Chris' message would have been, do not
waver. That's the one thing he would have wanted more than anything, that this
commitment to try to help stabilize fragile democracies is really what he had
devoted his life to. And that -- the challenge now is to instill the rule of
law and help them, not only find those who perpetrated, but to bring them to
justice in fair trials, and to be a contrast to, for example, the execution of
Moammar Gadhafi, but to put them in on trial in ways that reflect that these
are new democracies committed to the principles of law and order.
GWEN IFILL: That's what we will be watching for next.
Robin Wright, Frederic Wehrey, thank you both very much.
FREDERIC WEHREY: Thank you.
As the death of a U.S.
ambassador in Libya
demonstrates, the ultraconservative Salafi movement is pushing to the forefront
in the politics of the Middle East . The West should be
careful how it reacts.
By now you've probably heard. Just a few hours after an
angry mob of ultraconservative Muslimsstormed the U.S. Embassy in Cairo ,
the U.S.
ambassador to Libya
was killed during a protest in the city of Benghazi .
Both riots were provoked by the news that an anti-Muslim group in the United
States has released a film that
insults the Prophet Mohammed. In Egypt ,
the protestors hauled down the U.S.
flag and replaced it with the same black banner sometimes used by Al Qaeda.
Shades of Iran ,
1979. Scary stuff.
Both attacks are utterly outrageous. But perhaps the United
States shouldn't have been caught completely
off guard. The rioters in both cases come from the region's burgeoning Salafi movement, and the Salafis have been in the headlines
a lot lately. In Libya ,
over the past few months, they've been challenging the recently elected government by
demolishing ancient Sufi shrines, which they deem to be insufficiently Islamic.
In Tunisia , they've
been attacking businesses that sell alcohol and instigating
nasty social media campaigns about the country's female competitors in the
Olympics. In Syria's civil war, there are increasingreports that the opposition's wealthy Gulf financiers
have been channeling cash to Salafi groups, whose strict interpretation of Islam
is considered close to the puritanical Wahhabism of the Saudis and others.
Lately Salafi groups have been gaining fresh prominence in parts of the Islamic
world -- from Mali to Lebanon, fromKashmir to Russia's North Caucasus.
Some -- like journalist Robin Wright, who recently wrote
a New York Times op-ed on the subject -- say that this means we should
be really, really worried. Painting a picture of a new "Salafi
crescent" ranging from the Persian Gulf to North
Africa , she worries that this bodes ill for newly won freedoms
after the revolutions of 2011. Calling the rise of the new Salafi groups
"one of the most underappreciated and disturbing byproducts of the Arab
revolts," Wright says that they're now "moving into the political
space once occupied by jihadi militants, who are now less in vogue."
"[S]ome Islamists are more hazardous to Western interests and values than
others," she writes. "The Salafis are most averse to minority and
women's rights."
DEMOCRACY LAB
Others, like Egyptian journalist Mustafa Salama, dismiss this as hysteria. "The reality of the
movement is that it is fragmented, not uniform, within Salafis there are
various ideologies and discourses," Salama writes. "Furthermore being
a Salafi does not boil down to a set of specific political preferences."
The only thing that unites them, he argues, is their interest in returning to
the beliefs and practices of the original Islamic community founded by the
Prophet Mohammed -- a desire that, in itself, is shared by quite a few
mainstream Muslims. (The Arabic word salaf, meaning
"predecessors" or "ancestors," refers to the original
companions of the Prophet.) This doesn't mean that they're necessarily opposed
to freedom and democracy. During the revolution in Egypt ,
he says, some Salafis were "protecting Churches in Sinai and elsewhere
from vandalism and theft" at considerable risk to themselves, though the
fact wasn't reported in the Western media.
If the first death of a U.S.
ambassador in two decades is any indication, it's probably time that the world
starts paying attention to this debate. I think there are several points worth
mentioning.
First of all, however we define them, these new
"populist puritans" (as Wright aptly refers to them) are enjoying an
extraordinary boom. Though solid numbers are hard to come by, they're routinely
described as the fastest-growing movement in modern-day Islam. Unlike
the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt 's
Salafis barely figured in the political landscape during the Mubarak years --
then stormed onto the scene to capture a quarter of the
vote in the country's first democratic election last year. Their share of the
vote could well increase, given that the new Brotherhood-led government is
likely to have problems making good on the ambitious promises it's made to
Egyptian voters over the past year. Their rapid rise in Tunisia
is especially startling, given that country's relatively relaxed atmosphere
toward religion.
Indeed, if the history of revolutions shows us anything,
it's that transformative social upheavals of the kind we've seen in the Arab
Spring don't necessarily favor the moderates. On the day that the Shah left Iran
in 1979, it was by no means a foregone conclusion that the radical forces aroundAyatollah Khomeini, who followed his innovative theory of
clerical rule, would end up running the country. Secular socialists,
communists, liberal democrats, democratic nationalists, moderate Islamists, and
even other rival Shiite clerics were all vying for power. But Khomeini
ultimately triumphed because he offered forceful, uncorrupted leadership with a
simple message -- "Islamic government" -- that cut through the mayhem
with the authority of faith. Lenin understood the same political dynamic: Hence
his ruthlessly straightforward slogan "Bread, Peace, Land," which was perfectly calculated to
appeal to Russians wearied by anarchy, war, and social injustice.
The Salafi notion of returning to the purity of 7th-century
Islam can have the same kind of draw for some Muslims exasperated by everyday
corruption and abusive rule. Syria
offers a good example. If you're going up against Bashar al-Assad's helicopter
gunships armed with an antique rifle and a few rusty bullets, you'll probably
prefer to go into battle with a simple slogan on your lips. "Power sharing
for all ethnic groups in a liberal parliamentary democracy" might not cut
it -- especially if you happen to be a Sunni who's seen your relatives cut down by Assad's murderous
militias. This isn't to say that the opposition is now dominated
by Salafis; far from it. But it's safe to assume that the longer the war goes
on, the more pronounced the extremes will become.
At the same time, the Sunni Salafis are a major factor in
the growing global polarization of the Islamic community between Shiites and
Sunnis. (The French scholar of Islam Olivier Roy arguesthat the intra-Muslim rivalry between the two groups
has now become even more important than the presumed confrontation between Islam
and the West.) The fact that many Salafis in various parts of the world get
their financing from similarly conservative elements in Saudi
Arabia doesn't help. Perversely enough,
Iranian propaganda is already trying to portray the
West as backers of Salafi extremism in order to destabilize Tehran
and its allies. We'll be seeing a lot more of this sort of thing in the future,
I'm afraid.
In short, no one should count on the Salafis to go away any
time soon. So how should the outside world deal with them -- especially if they're going to go
around storming foreign embassies?
I think the answer is two-pronged. First, don't generalize.
Not all Salafis should be treated as beyond the pale. Salafis who are willing to
stand by the rules of democracy and acknowledge the rights of religious and
cultural minorities should be encouraged to participate in the system. With
time, voters in the new democracies of the region will discriminate between the
demagogues and the people who can actually deliver a better society.
Second, don't allow radicals to dictate the rules for
everyone else. This is why the outcome of the current political conflicts in Tunisia
and Libya are
extremely important for the region as a whole. In both countries, voters have
now had the opportunity to declare their political preferences in free
elections, and they have delivered pretty clear messages. Libyans voted overwhelmingly for secular politicians, while
Tunisians chose a mix of moderate Islamists and secularists. But
the Salafis in both places don't seem content to leave it at that, and are trying
to foment instability by instigating a culture war.
What's encouraging is that we're beginning to see some
pushback from ordinary Libyans and Tunisians who don't want to submit to the logic of
radicalization -- not to mention scholars at
the Arab world's most prestigious university, also in Cairo .
Don't be fooled by the rabble-rousers. The story in the Middle East
is still more interesting than the stereotypes.
No comments:
Post a Comment