Daily Times

There is growing realisation that the struggle against extremism cannot succeed by military means alone but also with education, healthcare, economic development and the values of democracy. Religious extremism and radicalism are a socio-economic challenge as much as they are a security problem. If vulnerable states are unable to educate their children or provide healthcare and jobs they will only add to an already frustrated generation, leading to further social problems that threaten society and the world. Indeed, addressing the problems of poverty, underdevelopment and lack of democracy in the developing world are an international priority.

There is urgent need for a message of hope to reverse the slide into divisiveness and hatred in which extremism prospers. This message starts with the assumption that reasonable people of all faiths disdain and reject destructive violence and intolerance — perpetrated in the name of religious faith or other ideologies. It ought to communicate that religious extremists, of all stripes and areas of operation, share common goals: the removal of democracy, the overturn of freedom of speech, religion and hard-won gains in civil rights by women and minorities.

Muslim countries must play their role by truly envisioning that education is a secular enterprise and thereby regain control of school curricula that have long been under the control of conservative religious leaders. The twin evils of fundamentalism and ideology must be tackled head-on at an early age through a secular education. Education that is governed by three principles: rationality (the autonomy of reason), freedom of will and action.

Moreover, there is a need to understand the links between poverty, weak and unstable states and violent extremism. The economic realities of Muslim societies fuel social unrest and extremism. On the one hand, a minority is increasingly wealthy and prosperous feeding off access to state power. On the other hand, millions are poor, disenfranchised and leading miserable lives. This is fertile ground for predatory non-state actors to find new recruits. Muslim states need critical social and economic reforms through peaceful and democratic means.

Another huge challenge is to counter the radical Islamist view that the democracy project does not suit Muslims or Islam. Islamists believe in a society of fixed polity governed by religious doctrines that are not changeable but which are, of their essence, unchangeable. This anti-democratic outlook does not allow a competing view of how society or politics can be governed within a common space or accept that other views are equally valid or accommodate change. Instead of apologising for democracy, its proponents in the Muslim world and beyond must defend the right of individuals to espouse the pluralistic values of democracy that some may deem offensive, a right enshrined in almost every democratic constitution.

The 17th century French scientist and philosopher, Blaise Pascal, said: “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it with religious conviction.” We have to re-examine the theology that leads to violent conflict and extremist behaviour. This is a clear requirement specific to our time, when religion is sometimes associated with beheadings, terrorist attacks and extreme violence. We have to be prepared to ask uncomfortable questions: are holy texts being interpreted correctly? Why do ‘believers’ kill in the name of God? Why do they rejoice in holy war and the taking of human life? What drives them to hate their enemies and terrorise non-believers? Does the ‘rigidity’ of belief encourage extremist behaviour? A thoughtful discussion on the misuse of theology would help in understanding religious extremism. It would also help if moderates reclaim the task of religious interpretation, so long the domain of extremists and militants.

But there are limits to what states alone can do to combat extremism. It is a fact that extremism is alluring, especially to young people. People are often drawn from non-violent extremism to violent extremism. Extremists tend to overpower other reasonable voices within the community debate. Furthermore, wars and military responses appeal to sections of the military-industrial complex. People’s sentiments are whipped up to encourage demonisation and discord. Jingoist rhetoric drowns out the voice of liberalism and peace. The pursuit of military action without regard to its consequences, allows extremist ideas to gain traction. Advanced democracies particularly must resist such inclinations.

Ultimately, it is a tolerant civil society that is the best bulwark against hate speech and hate literature that incites violence along religious lines. It is a vibrant civil society that must take the lead in rooting out the deeply entrenched religious extremism in society. The people must take a firm stand against those extremist elements that instigate attacks on religious minorities in the name of Islam. The people should hear the silent cry of those who were victims of a radical mindset that knows only violence, hatred and revenge, a mindset that can only cause pain, suffering, destruction and tears. The long drawn out effort to rid societies of violent extremism will require strong commitment and resolve.

The writer can be reached at shgcci@gmail.com