"... because Muslim leaders are driving on Interstate-95 South from Washington D.C., hoping to reach New York."
This is my response to an embarrassing question that always comes up during my religious courses and lectures: "If Islam truly champions the values of equality, freedom, and compassion, then why do we see the Muslim world in chaos?"
Case in point: Syria. Since the largely peaceful uprising against a four decade long dictatorship started four months ago, nearly 1700 civilians have been killed by the regime, including 200 deaths in the week leading up to the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan.
And since Muslim governments were the first to demand a halt in U.S. military operations against Taliban during the 2001 Ramadan, Syrian forces must have exercised restraint during Ramadan, right?
Wrong.
Ground raids and tank shelling continued against the residents of the cities of Hana and Deir Ezzor claiming a dozen lives and maiming many more all during the first week of Ramadan.
Perhaps the reason White House spokesman Jay Carney called the cruelty "grotesque."
Crushing a largely peaceful protest with brutal force by the Syrian regime during Ramadan illustrates a larger point; the hypocrisy of variegated Muslim dictators. The Saudi King spins around in Mercedes' while women in the Kingdom yearn for a driver's license. The Iranian Ayatullah hands down death sentences to apostates while eager to spread his brand of faith to others. And the Pakistani government makes life hell for minorities like Christians and Ahmadiyya Muslims while providing safe havens to terrorists -- all in the name of religion.
"We will get you to New York", these leaders promise the masses while cruising down 95-south.
And demanding peace from non-Muslim governments during Ramadan? Well, that's just another one of their hypocrisies. The 1980-88 war between Iran and Iraq showed no respect to Ramadan. In the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Ramadan never brought a lull to fighting between the Palestinians and the Israelis during the September 2000 intifada. And in 2008 the Taliban rejected a Pakistani ceasefire in the northwest of the country, the Taliban stronghold, during Ramadan.
President Assad reads this and muses, "But we have a consistent record. Remember when Syria and Egypt launched the 1973 war against Israel during Ramadan?"
Disgusting.
If Muslim autocrats claim to be the followers of Prophet Muhammad (sa), they must take the high moral ground -- I-95 North -- as leadership in Islam is a trust, not a feather in the cap. The Prophet (who never sought leadership in his lifetime) said, "Office is a trust and a source of limitation and remorse on the Day of Judgment except for him who takes it up with full sense of responsibility and duly discharges its obligations (Muslim). " The Holy Quran further supports this: "This is the Home of the Hereafter! We give it to those who desire not self-exaltation in the earth, nor corruption" (28:84).
That's two out of two for many Muslim autocrats who are clinging on to power through corruption and force for the purposes of self-exaltation.
I am sure they are feeling bewildered and trapped. Here is why: If they play the religion card, Prophet's saying "I do not appoint anyone to public office who asks for it or desires it (Bukhari and Muslim)" stands in their way. And if they switch to the secular standards, then relinquishing power is the natural response to such a large scale uprising.
Some falsely accuse the Prophet of fighting during the month of Ramadan by citing the battle of Badr. What is glossed over though is the fact that Muslims were merely defending themselves against an army three times their size, bent on annihilating them.
People ask me, "Will the Muslims following these leaders on 95-South, ever change direction?" "They already have," I respond. "The younger Muslims look at the exit signs and wonders: 'Why are we in South Carolina or Georgia if our destination was New York.' Then they either take charge, replace the drivers (the Arab Spring) or they simply disembark and take a northbound bus (folks like me).
My generation remains proud of Islam -- the faith, and we remain proud of millions of hardworking Muslims -- the followers. But we are ashamed of these autocrats. And I say to them: Forget the Arab spring. Instead brace for revolts in every region, in every season. For your conduct brings us all shame.
Not to mention the embarrassing questions that I end up facing during my courses.
As an adjunct faculty for religion and history at the Community Colleges of Baltimore County, Dr. Younus has given dozens of courses about true Islam. He also serves as a clinical associate professor at the University of Maryland, School of Medicine. He can be reached at Faheem.Younus@Ahmadiyya.us
Amb. Marc Ginsberg: Mideast Milosevic
Harris Zafar: Iran's Death Penalty for Christian Pastor Violates the Quran
Dr. Jeffrey H. Toney: Amidst Syria's Madness, A Voice of Reason
Rami Nashashibi: Ramadan and the Riots: A Spiritual Agitation
According to Muslim tradition, which by the way is the only source for this info, the Quraishites headed for the battle of Badr to defend their caravan that Muhammad was preparing to intercept in violation of the "forbidden months" during which Arabia's inhabitants were supposed to abstain from warfare. There is even a Quranic text justifying Muhammad's violation of this time-honored respite.
As for Syria, it has a substantial non-Muslim population (overwhelmingly supportive of Assad) so better keep religion out of this
A. Muhammad's followers started attacking Meccan caravans.
B. The Meccans sent an armed force to protect a caravan and confront the Muslims.
C. The Battle of Badr ensued
d. The Quran justified making war in the sacred/forbidden months since Muslims had to stand-up to Quraish's "agression" and unbelief in Muhammad's message.
Now you could reasonably and legitimately say the Muhammad had to do this to spread the faith against the will of the "unbelievers". That would justify his actions from a political standpoint but then Assad of Syria could just as easily use the same argument for using his army against his opponents in the month of Ramadan.
The truth is, if the moral judgment of Syria, Iran, Pakistan and other countries comes from non-Muslims, it is too easy to discount it. It has to come from reform-minded Muslims - a LOT of reform minded Muslims - who can eventually convince the rest of their co-religionists that a secular, pluralistic and democratic form of governance is the only one that makes sense for the long haul.
Changing people's minds on this critical subject is a monumental task. Religious people can be addicted to power just as much as anyone else. Power had to be wrested out of the hands of Christians in order to move into the Age of Enlightenment. That's what has to happen in the Islamic world as well.
Iran, that's who.
And the answer is simple: Anytime you give a religion - any religion - control of the political apparatus, you end up with 1984's boot in the face.
Muslims, speaking broadly, don't accept that truth. That's why there are 60 (count em, 60) explicitly Muslims nations with a combined population of 1.6 billion. They think the idea of a Muslim nation is a good idea - when it fact it is the worst possible idea.
I don't mean to say it's worse than an explicitly Christian nation. When Christians believed that idea, they created hell on earth, too.
So there needs to be a revolution in Islamic thinking - a wholesale sloughing off of the old memes concerning the joining of church/mosque and state.
Otherwise you'll keep going south on I-95 from Washington even though you want to get to New York.
Also, the fact that an article about brutal autocratic regimes only found it necessary to use the adjective "disgusting" in reference to a violation of a holy month is odd.