A Word Lost… Between Two Languages
Jihad el Khazen Al-Hayat - 19/10/05//
"Future Jihad" and "Understanding Jihad" are two new books that aren't my biography. Nothing is worth mentioning in either book; they discuss the topic of jihad once again, because this is the season for it.
The first book's full title is "Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America," by Walid Phares, a Lebanese who resides in the US and holds right wing positions on Lebanese politics about which I have no objection, for it's his right to think whatever he wants. However, this ties him to one party, and the reader should bear this mind, as well as the fact that he's very distant from any direct contact with terror or its practitioners, or any field experience in the topic.
The second book is "Understanding Jihad," by David Cook, an associate professor of religious studies at Rice University. He presents an objective study that tries to do away with misunderstanding surrounding jihad in Islam. I was happy to read about the book that its author explains that jihad is not "holy war." In fact, this Arabic term "holy war" comes to us after being translated literally from English, where it is a translation of jihad, and so the world is lost between two languages.
Even though I haven't read the two books and other books that I will discuss today. I was reading the latest New York Review of Books, which covers new books, as its title indicates. I noticed ads about books that carried my name ("jihad") or other books, ordering them through the publisher or through amazon.com after looking at the reviews and deciding which ones deserved to be read.
I will read Walid Phares' book and refer to parts of it in this column, although the publisher was not at all encouraging. He presents the writer as an expert on terrorism, which reminds me of all the so-called experts these days. He then says that the book answers all of the important questions like how long will the war last, and whether the US is safe domestically.
The only correct answer to such questions is "nobody knows." The terrorists themselves don't know, and whether the US is ready or not is a matter about which I prefer to hear statements from the pillars of the government and security agencies, because the information that they hide won't be known by a university professor or "expert."
In contrast, David Cook does not travel up this blind alley in his book Understanding Jihad. He suffices by outlining the practical and theoretical meanings of jihad in relevant texts. It's clear that this book is directed toward western readers and not Arabs or Muslims who know their religion.
Another book, entitled "The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global," is by Fawaz Gerges, a true expert in the subject, who explains that al-Qaida does not represent a unified front, or jihad, against the Christian west; in reality it only represents a minority within the jihad movement and its strategy is criticized by most Islamists, who want to change Islamic societies and not wage war against the rest of the world.
Perhaps the best thing in the book is the direct information from jihadists, as gathered by Gerges. He's not a "remote control" expert, who repackages published material; he presents new material and profound analysis that points the reader in the right direction.
Those who reviewed the book include Professor Fred Halliday, from the London School of Economics. He needs no introduction and I've read more than one book by him, since "Arabia without Sultans," on the Dhofar rebellion. I found his analysis to be mature and he has moved slowly from the left to the center.
There is an ad for a new book by Fred Halliday, entitled "One Hundred Myths about the Middle East." While David Cook corrects mistakes about the concept of jihad, Halliday corrects mainly political mistakes about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the invasion of Iraq and the struggle over Afghanistan after the Soviet occupation. Of course, he doesn't avoid other controversial subjects, like the rights of women in Islam, oil and its role in the struggles of the Middle East, or the absence of such a role.
The New York Review mentioned two other books that I'd like to compare: "The Right War? The Conservative Debate on Iraq," and "Al Qaeda Now: Understanding Today's Terrorists." The former is edited by Gary Rosen and includes articles written by some respected thinkers and others by well-known extremists, neo-conservative partisans of Israel in the Bush administration and around it. I ordered the book and will return to it, but I don't need to read it in order to know that the opinion of pro-war figures like Robert Kagan, William Kristol, David Brooks, Max Boot, Charles Krauthammer and Reuel Gerecht. They and others defended and continue to defend the destructive war that has killed 2,000 Americans and more than 100,000 Iraqis, to serve Israel, even if the administration doesn't realize this.
The second book is edited by Karen Greenberg and from the contributors' names, they seem to be more objective, although there are some extremists like Gerecht. There are respected names like Greenberg herself, Jessica Stern, Yosri Fouda, Salameh Nematt, Octavia Nasr, and others.
I read because my work assumes that I read. I will read what I can of these books, while readers have their choice of what to read.
http://www.j-khazen.blogspot.com
|
