In the ongoing debate on terrorism, nothing is more polarising, nothing sends political discourse into a tailspin more than the contention that foreign policy is one of the root causes of terrorism. As much as it is a favourite slogan among Muslims, it sends skeptics of Muslims and Islam into a near xenophobic rage. After the verbal fireworks go off, the dialogue fades until the next Islamo-crisis. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Although such linkage began mostly after 9/11, it resurged again in full force after the recent attempted car bombings in London and Glasgow. In the blogs and newspapers, the assertion was made back and forth and back again. Two hundred Muslims gathered in London on Saturday to discuss what to do about terrorism and the official (sensible, yet obvious) advice to the public was that Muslims should report suspicious activity to the police. But inside, "foreign policy was mentioned over and over again," according to one participant. "Whatever the government or some MPs say, it is a factor that is fuelling extremism."

The Muslim reliance on this argument is understandable because it's absolutely true. With religious, ethnic, and cultural links to the scores of countries subjected to Western "interests," evidence is both anecdotal and explicit. From Mohammad Siddique Khan's explicit mention of Britain's involvement in Iraq and elsewhere, to Osama bin Laden's assertion that he doesn't have a problem with Sweden, you can't get it more direct than from the terrorist's mouth.

The counterargument is that Muslims are being cynical and selective with the foreign policy argument. A blind eye to Darfur has been mentioned, as has the sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq and elsewhere. Palestine, despite the very real injustices committed against it by Israel, commands a disproportionate attention among Muslims when compared to either of the above where far more Muslims die (many at the hands of other Muslims). Palestine, in particular, has become a political Mecca, towards which Muslims direct their attention every day.

Still, these two modern struggles - against terrorism on one hand and unjust foreign policy towards the Muslim world on the other - are valid and necessary. But like matter meeting anti-matter, when these distinct issues are mixed together, everything disintegrates. Muslims around the world are on one side, Western governments and their non-Muslim citizens on the other, hurling accusations in equal measure until they're incapable of seeing the grain of truth each possesses.

More importantly, what's the end game of the foreign policy-terrorism connection? As an argument, it is incapable of altering the foreign policy it condemns. The masses of people who could sway government decisions will not accept challenging the injustice of foreign policy in Iraq or Palestine by accepting the threat that an injustice (terrorism) will occur to them. Yes, the link between them is true, but the foreign policy argument is a non sequitur. In fact, it is the mother of all non-sequiturs.

Linking foreign policy to an increased risk of terrorism isn't merely a casual observation. The only possible course of action is to change those unjust policies. But it's hard to influence people this way, especially when the majority of citizens who hate the Iraq mess and want a way out don't want to appear to capitulate to terrorism. Tony Blair and George Bush linked the threat of terrorism to foreign policy because fear of terrorism helped promote their grand foreign policy designs. How on earth will using the same fear dismantle them?

When citizens - especially Muslim ones - start saying that terrorism is blowback for foreign policy, those who conflated the two in the first place know that it suits their purposes as well. It "proves" the government's point that "if we don't get them there, they'll get us here" - even if everything is twisted around in reality. The public fear of terrorism (promoted by the government) will not be soothed with more fear of terrorism (as argued by the blowback proponents). The answer is not to buy the government's logic, but to maintain a principled alternative.

Incidentally, this "serves you right" approach to terrorism is far less prevalent in the US than in Britain, partially because of fear of the government, but also because this approach has simply never caught on with Muslims or war opponents there. Instead, the arguments dealing with torture, WMD lies, civil liberties, direct and indirect deaths, exacerbating of sectarian tensions, failure to deliver security, sabre-rattling with Iran, etc., have all worked to erode the Bush administration's arguments. For the first time in years, there is a sense of real momentum in the US for ending this fiasco. And none of it has to do with conflating foreign policy with terrorism.

In the Qur'an it says "Let not the hatred of a people toward you move you to commit injustice" (Qur'an 5:8). In other words, Muslims should not legitimise any motivation to injustice because it is only the injustice (terrorism, in this case) that matters. Even if that motivation is cited by the perpetrators, our instinct should be not to honour it. In the context of this issue, that motivation should now be tainted.

If despite all this, Muslims and others insist on reducing the threat of extremism in Britain and elsewhere by addressing the Iraq conflict, then at least Muslims should strive to end that conflict with arguments that work - not with arguments that don't. In the four years since Iraq was invaded, there is no evidence that the blowback argument has had any positive effect. The more terrorism and foreign policy are mixed up, the more the circular arguments will continue and the more things will never change.

Give people a way out by condemning foreign policy on its own injustices. Condemn terrorism by its own inherent injustice. And put the Grand Canyon in between them.

Excellent article.

I say one thing for sure, stop making excuses on foreign policies.If you don't like the west, go back to where you belong instead of creating fear in those who wants to modernise and improve their standards of living in the west.
Too many authors here add fuel in the brain of people who are easily brainwashed. These are the one's that are easily influenced and ready to die because they can't even make a valued decision.
My life is made hell now that I have to stay indoors most of the time as I would be easily picked upon as a potention terrorist. We have made the west paranoid about US.

Munna, you sound like a very selfish and foolish fellow. Anybody who denies that a murderous foreign policy isn't to blame is clearly living in a fool's paradise. Why should people "go back to where they belong" for speaking truth? If you are so afraid of being picked on, perhaps you should move elsewhere. Or maybe you are just paranoid.

BushTerrorWarForMakeBenefitGloriousNationOfIsrael. You are the one that is a twit. I am neither foolish nor selfish. I have thrived to better myself personally and professionally. You like it that all of us are painted with the same brush??In a pile of fish if one is rotten, the whole lot will stink and needs to be thrown away. This is what the host community would be asking for.

[Edited by moderator for content]

Seems to me that what Bush and Blair conflated after 9/11/2001 was the strategic need to deal with a totalitarian secular Arab threat (Saddam), and a totalitarian religious one (Sunni and Shia Salafism, expressed in Al Qaeda and the Iranian theocracy). This confusion of product (terror) and author (totalitarians who happen to be Muslim) is the source of the "non sequitur" Zahed has so well described. The unfortunate lumping of all these various and discrete, but serious, threats under the term "terrorists" has confused issues since the 1990's, at least. The confusion has allowed both the brilliant propagandists (OBL/Zawahiri et al.) and the intellectually circumscribed cynics (BTWFM...et al.) to focus on the supposed nexus of "terrorism" and the foreign policies launched in response to "terror". Doesn't the relationship between progressive secular globalization and regressive theocratic religiosity, rather than that between foreign policies and terrorism, offer more of a "sequitur" against which to measure contemporary action and thinking?

Good Morning to all,
It has been forever since I have posted a comment!

I think that munna is dealing with two seperate issues: the posion spread by the anti-west Islamicists [sp?], and having to deal with being a member of a very unpopular minority group.

BTWMBGNI, do you live in the US? It is not easy being a "visible" muslim in the US. I am a former US Army soldier. If I can get the Army to pay for my grad school, I will go back in the service. I am also married to an active duty (Muslim) soldier.
The point of all this is that I am about as American as apple pie; nevertheless, when I went to the on-post pharmacy I got asked if I was a traitor to the government. I confronted the tech in question and everything turned out fine.

The moral of my story is that when dealing with humans, issues are NEVER simple, monocausal things.

If one doesn't like the US's foreign policies, then do something constructive about it: vote; stage a protest; write letters to your congresspersons; join CAIR or another human rights originization- do something!

emjayinc: that was a very impressive post!

Peace to all,
CM

My friends, please see below why people have been mislead!!
Pak Has No Right on Kashmir: Azad
Srinagar, July 09, KONS: The chief minister, Ghulam Nabi Azad, today said that Pakistan had no claim on Kashmir and that it had mislead Kashmiri youth into taking up arms (against India). He said that Pakistan had admitted after 60 years that the option of independence for the state was not possible.

“For many year now, Pakistan and the part of Kashmir under its control, have been misleading Kashmiri youth and compelling them to take up arms,” Azad told a Congress workers’ convention in Baramulla.

“Pakistan has no right or claim on Kashmir, and the government of the country is now conceding that no such thing as independence (for J and K is) possible,” he asserted.

“Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, Ghulam Muhammad Sadiq, Mir Qasim and later chief ministers of the state, too, have been stressing the point that Pakistan has no right on Kashmir and that it should not mislead Kshmirirs,” he said.

“Every five years, a bogey is raised among the public with the aim of creating discontent and disturbance. This is not healthy for the state,” he said.

“Those who claim to be well wishers of the public should try to mislead people in the state, the country and oversees,” he said.
“People who come here from the other Kashmir say that they will take another 200 years to achieve the political freedoms prevailing in Jammu and Kashmir,” he said.

Once again calling upon militants to shun the path of violence, the chief minister said that he tells New Delhi clearly that if the misled youth are brought on the right track and told the truth, it would be better for them (the militants) and their families.

“Don’t take recourse to guns, grenades and bullets, but strive day and night for the development and prosperity of your mother land,” he said, addressing militants.

“Eighty-five per cent of the population of our country is Hindu, but in spite of that we have a Muslim president, a Sikh prime minister and army chief, and a Dalit chief justice,” he said.

“This is possible only in India and nowhere else,” he said.

“The impression that Hindus are enemies of Muslims is wrong. There are no Hindus in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is Muslims who are pitted against each other there,” he said.

A wonderful article.

I have little understanding of US foreign policy, being very skeptical of our mainstream news media because most of them print "spin" and are very slanted.

Personally, when referring to terrorists, I use a qualifier to describe country of origin or terrorist actions or even religion.
Christian terrorists are in the same class as Muslim terrorists--the operative word is the "t" word.

So little is heard of peaceful Muslims in the media that people in the west tend to lump them together with the terrorists, which is extremely unjust.

But here is a true story from a small-town paper in our county. After the 9-11 attacks, some jerk wrote a letter to the editor denigrating the Khoury brothers who have had a popular grocery store for years. I can't remember all the details but it was slanderous and racist. But when the next issue came out it included letters from irate readers defending the Khourys and describing all their public service activities and donations to local functions/charities and affirming what decent and honorable people they are.
The Khourys are from Palestine.

People in the west are as varied as people anywhere. But as in other parts of the world, they cannot control their elected leaders or make themselves heard except on a local level. There are good people here, as there are all over the world.

Grace in Nevada, USA

This is one of the best articles I've read on altmuslim! Thanks for such a level-headed, lucid, and eloquent commentary on this complicated issue.

Your personal and professional success is irrelevant to this forum, munna. Your selfishness and lack of concern and education for the points raised in this article are evident. Telling people to "go back where they came from" is the rhetoric of cowards who seek to monopolize and stifle debate. Also, refrain from spamming unrelated material, and leave the hindu fanatic act out of this discussion.

"If one doesn't like the US's foreign policies, then do something constructive about it: vote; stage a protest; write letters to your congresspersons; join CAIR or another human rights originization- do something!"

These are wonderful suggestions, but they have all proven to be ineffective ineffective. I doubt Americans care about foreign policy since most are geographically illiterate and have little curiosity in the outside world.

Bushterror, it is not you who can tell me what to do or not. I have a brain and can make an evaluative judgement. My perspectives and I am using my rights to share. You can either take it or lump it.So when some one give you a reference you call it scamming. Is this why Dr. Haneef has been arrested? their minds have been brainwashed. Keep religion as a private matter. No religion can be superior or better than other religion. It is a matter of beiefs and values someone hold and not to be imposed on others. These people are prepared to die and kill others in the Lal Masjid in pakistan. In the name of what I ask.??

BMW, be careful about sterotyping people. There is usually more differences within populations than between populations.

Actually, I AM going to do something about it.
MY major is in Social Sciences with an emphasis in social problems and conflict mediation. I am currently halfway through the courses that I need to become a state-approved conflict mediator. I plan to get my master's in social work and advocate for oppressed populations. I would like to work on the US/Mexico border, advocating for the undocumented migrant population.

As I live in the middle of the midwest, I am often (usually) the only muslim that most people have met. I always encourage people to ask me questions, even if the questions are hostile ones. I think that us muslims in the USA need to get out of safe little muslim enclaves and start just simply talking to people. We need to become visible members of our communities.

I have found that once people realize that I am just a regular ol' American, they settle down and become much more receptive to what I have to say.

I was a Quaker before I embraced Islam. The Quakers have a saying, "What has thee done to spread the light today?" Islam has a strong emphasis on social justice, that tends to get forgotten in the Western media.

Most people here in Kansas have never met a muslim, and don't know anything about Islam. We have to "come out" as muslims, so the folks around us realize that we are not The Other.

BMT: I can "hear" your anger and frustration about the current situation. This is not a simple problem, and it will not go away anytime soon. Anger can be very helpful as an impetus [sp?] towards action; however, making personal attacks towards munna (or anyone else) just makes you look like a troll and destroys your credibility.

I think that Americans do care about foreign policy; they just haven't been educated about it, or they find the topic too intimidating and complicated to deal with.

My dream ticket for the next presidential election is Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert.

Peace to all!
CM

Munna, I very doubt your perceived abilities because your statements are stereotypical and unrelated to the topic of discussion. You're in no position to dictate what people can and can't say about western foreign policy, just like you no power to tell people how to practice their respective faiths. I'm not Muslim but know your prime inspiration for these silly anti-Muslim diatribes comes from a lack of education and far right Hindu nationalism. Why else would you be spamming about Pakistan and Kashmir?
And thanks for your words, Chicanamuslima,
but I tend to be a cynic about Americans and their intentions on the world stage. I have seen little to change that perception, but if you're willing to vote for comedians, it shows a serious lack of confidence in your political culture.
Take care.

BTW:
You are correct. I do not have ANY confidence in the political culture of the US.

Grassroots movements have been proven to be effective in the past in the US; however, it seems like americans today are so burned out and apathetic towards social issues. I do not know what the answer is. I just know that I gotta do something, otherwise I'll go insane.

One of the reasons why Stewart/Colbert is so popular is because they are so visibly outraged by our politicians, and are using satire to get their point across. It is said that the core of all great humor is rage -the same could be said about Mind of Mencia and South Park.

I think that if more americans actually voted, then things might get better. Too many americans believe that their vote does not really count, so they don't bother to vote.

There just has to be some way of gettting americans out of our collective apathy. We did it in the '60s. I wish that I had more answers for you, I really do.

Peace,
CM

chican, you give in so easily just like all the brainwashed ar.. hole to this bush terror who pressurise u so much. He is no use and full of gas !!!He needs a break n will get it once he joined the right army and will fade away just like gas.....

Simply put, the muslim backwardness is only due to (1) neglect of education (madrasa education takes you nowhere), (2) refusal to limit family size to one or two children, this is the main reason for poverty among muslims (3) stop listening seriously to speeches of radicals and try to integrate with others and (4) do not expect govt/politicians to help you out, politicians only know to help themselves and govt has to think of all of their citizens, rather than only a particular community and lastly dont carry imaginary grievances. In India at least all are equals and muslims also should think that they have a role to play and stop acting like an aggrieved community. Look around and see how many muslims are in very high positions in government, judiciary, business and other fields. Perhaps this could motivate you.

Thank you for confirming my suspicion that you indeed are a hindu extremist, munna. The reference to "gas" might have been amusing had you used spellcheck. In future, try to refrain from posting nonsense.

BushTerror, I am a muslim and believe that everyone has a right to practice any religion. You are suspicious of me being a hindu fanatics. I don't know you but I can tell you that bollywood stars like Sharuk Khan, Salman Khan, Amir Khan have all proved how to live in harmony. You want muslim to alienate from others or subject others to violence and fears. You id in itself serves the truth about you my friend. Grow up and learn from life.

You go, munna, really refreshing to witness a muslim refusing to be spun up by the likes of BTWFM, who, after all, is the very textbook illustration of the very point that Zahed presents. Refusing to rise to his hindu v. muslim race-baiting also admirable.