I share with you four additional passages that caught my notice in John L. Esposito and Dalia Mogahed, Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think (New York: Gallup Press, 2007):
When we asked respondents in 10 predominantly Muslim countries how they view a number of nations, the attributes they most associate with the United States are: ruthless (68%), scientifically and technologically advanced (68%), aggressive (66%), conceited (65%), and morally decadent (64%). (84)
When Gallup asked the open-ended question: “In your own words, what do you resent most about the West?” the most frequent response across all [predominantly Muslim] countries among moderates and radicals is “sexual and cultural promiscuity,” followed by “ethical and moral corruption” and “hatred of Muslims.” (88)
Reflecting the importance of Islam, the most frequent response given by both groups [radicals and moderates] to the questions about what the West can do to improve relations is: more respect, consideration, and understanding of Islam as a religion; not underestimating the status of Arab/Muslim countries; being fair and less prejudiced. (91)
A recent study shows that only 46% of Americans think that “bombing and other attacks intentionally aimed at civilians” are “never justified,” while 24% believe these attacks are “often or sometimes justified.”
Contrast this with data taken the same year from some of the largest majority Muslim nations, in which 74% of respondents in Indonesia agree that terrorist acts are “never justified”; in Pakistan, that figure is 86%; in Bangladesh, 81%; and in Iran, 80%.
Similarly, 6% of the American public thinks that attacks in which civilians are targets are “completely justified.” As points of comparison, in both Lebanon and Iran, this figure is 2%, and in Saudi Arabia, it’s 4%. In Europe, Muslims in Paris and London are no more likely than their counterparts in the general public to believe attacks on civilians are justified and are as likely to reject violence, even for a “noble cause.” (95)
Diagnosing terrorism as a symptom and Islam as the problem, though popular in some circles, is flawed and has serious risks with dangerous repercussions. It confirms radical beliefs and fears, alienates the moderate Muslim majority, and reinforces a belief that the war against global terrorism is really war against Islam. Whether one is radical or moderate, this negative attitude is a widespread perception.
In an International Herald Tribune op-ed piece, Fawaz Gerges recounted an interview he had with an Islamic leader in Egypt, Abed al-Rahim Barakat, who echoed the pervasive perception among Muslims that the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are wars against Islam. “President Bush himself used the word ‘crusade’ to describe his war on terror,” Barakat told Gerges. When Gerges responded, “It was a slip of tongue,” Barakat insisted, “No, it was a Freudian slip. He revealed what he feels deep inside.” (96)
***
I’m grateful to Anne Palmieri and Nicol Sorenson-Legakis for calling this very interesting and encouraging piece to my attention:
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In