New Castle News
NEW CASTLE —
What’s in a name?
Quite a bit it seems, when discussing the source of international terrorism.
The Obama administration has been trying to shift some of the rhetoric regarding terrorism away from references to Islam. Even though al-Qaida and related organizations base their movement — and the acts of terror associated with it — on their version of Islam, the White House wants to downplay the link.
The reason is simple: Overheated language linking Islam to terror runs the risk of offending the hundreds of millions of Moslems around the world who aren’t followers of Osama bin Laden and his ilk.
The Obama administration worries that an overemphasis on Islam when discussing terrorism could backfire, causing non-radical Moslems to become suspicious of Western intentions.
There is some logic to this argument. Al-Qaida, for example, has long sought to frame its war with the West in terms of oppressed versus oppressor. The United States in particular is presented as wanting to weaken, if not destroy, Islam.
The last thing the U.S. wants to do is play into this distorted version of reality and lose potential allies in the Islamic world.
There are, however, critics of the Obama administration’s stance on this subject — and not all of them are the typical political players. Concerns exist that the effort to separate terrorism from Islam may go too far, by minimizing the factors that are driving these radicals to commit violent acts, while allowing them to recruit new followers.
There is no doubt the extremists use their interpretations of Islam to justify their actions and to reach out within the Islamic world. A failure to comprehend and acknowledge this link poses its own inherent risks. How can you defeat ideological-based terrorism if you don’t recognize the beliefs that are fueling it?
We think a middle ground exists on this issue. Yes, the United States and those officials who speak for it and represent it need to be sensitive to the fact that Islam is not the enemy. Rather, the enemies are groups of zealots who twist a particular religion to serve their interests.
There is nothing wrong with admitting this fact. All major religions have factions and fringes that distort messages of faith and compassion — and produce something vile in its place. We note there is one self-proclaimed Christian group in this country that makes a habit out of protesting at the funerals of soldiers killed in combat. Other Christianity-based organizations embrace violent and racist views.
Do these groups represent mainstream Christianity? Of course not. But they exist, and to properly challenge them, it’s essential to know where they are coming from.
The same holds true with Islamic extremists. They need to be exposed as betrayers of their faith. That can’t be accomplished by pretending Islam isn’t involved.
