Risks to secular government
By RONALD MEINARDUS

MANILA -- In the Cold War era, the global confrontation was basically 
ideological. Two radically different socio-political blueprints were pitted 
against each other: democracy and capitalism on one side, one-party-rule and 
communism on the other. The opponents, then, were two superpowers and their 
allies -- all sovereign states. 
Today, the nature of the global confrontation has altered dramatically. Many 
conflicts have become religious, and the nature of the combatants has changed. 
On one side of the divide stand those governments that profess to fight for 
democratic and liberal values; the other side is taken up by religious 
fundamentalists. The "democrats" represent sovereign states, the religious 
fighters are organized in informal networks, movements and insurgency groups. 

The new international order seems far less orderly than the one left behind a 
decade and a half ago. The premature, if not naive, assumption that the 
collapse of the Soviet Union would herald "the end of history" is constantly 
and brutally refuted in many parts of the world. Compared with the state of 
world affairs today, the Cold War-era resembles a period of international 
tranquillity. 

One of the striking (and also disturbing) features of the new world "disorder" 
is that the United States has not found a successful recipe to deal with 
Islamic extremism. On the contrary, much of what Washington has been doing in 
the past two years has played into the hands of the extremists. All along, 
those opposing the war in Iraq have argued that military aggression and 
occupation are counterproductive and strategically wrong. Interestingly, this 
contention is now seconded in a report by the U.S. Defense Science Board, an 
advisory panel of the Pentagon, which says America is failing in its long-term 
strategic efforts: 

In stark contrast to the Cold War, the U.S. today is not seeking to contain a 
threatening state empire, but rather seeking to convert a broad movement within 
Islamic civilization to accept the value structure of Western modernity -- an 
agenda hidden within the official rubric of "war on terrorism." 

According to the report this is a strategic mistake. Unfortunately, the 
military confrontation in the Arabian deserts and the underlying clash of 
Western modernity vs. fundamentalist rejection of this worldview has had 
negative repercussions throughout the globe. These are felt everywhere Muslims 
and Christians live side by side. With its large Muslim minorities from 
Northern Africa and Turkey, Western Europe is a case in point. 

Ironically, the Netherlands, arguably the most liberal of all countries, has 
become a battleground of what journalists term a "clash of cultures." The 
brutal killing of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh in early November by a zealous 
Muslim immigrant has provoked a violent backlash in the form of bombings, fires 
and vandalism at numerous mosques. All this has occurred in a country thus far 
considered a haven of religious peace and tolerance. To say the Dutch are in a 
state of collective shock is no exaggeration. Some argue the relationship 
between Christian majorities and Muslim minorities may never be the same again. 

"The future integration of its Muslim populations is the subtext to just 
everything Europe thinks and does these days," says an American commentator in 
the Netherlands. 

Most discussions in Europe related to the Muslim issue have two common 
denominators. First, Europeans see the events in the Netherlands as a reminder 
that the government's immigration policies have failed to reach their primary 
objective -- the integration of the newly arrived Muslims as citizens with 
equal rights and obligations. 

Today, many Muslim immigrants are without jobs, don't speak the local language, 
and remain culturally alienated and segregated in what German observers term 
"parallel societies." These Muslim "enclaves" in Western countries have become 
breeding grounds for Islamic fundamentalism. 

While a lack of opportunities for integration is one aspect, the unwillingness 
on the side of many Muslim immigrants to become a part of the social mainstream 
is another: "We Muslims lack a theology of integration," says Mohammed Aman 
Hobohm, a leading member of the Central Committee of Muslims in Germany. 
According to Hobohm, the Quran offers no guidelines to Muslims on how to behave 
in non-Muslim environments. 

Recent developments in the Netherlands pose fundamental challenges to European 
societies and political classes. Everyone seems to agree that the state must 
defend its citizens against attacks from religious and other fanatics. But just 
how far should and may the liberal state go to curb illiberal behavior? 

In Europe, this has become more than a question of police tactics. There is a 
general consensus that more should be done to integrate the Muslim minorities 
into the European mainstream. But this policy -- from a liberal vantage point 
-- has limitations. At what stage does a well-intended policy aimed at 
integrating a religiously and culturally different group become coercive and 
oppressive -- and thus incompatible with the underlying liberal principles of 
religious tolerance and acceptance of diversity? 

Regarding the role of religion in public life and politics, Western Europe and 
the U.S. are poles apart. The re-election of President George W. Bush is but 
one indicator of the political power of religion in America. In this regard, 
Europe is still rather different. Some even say recent trans-Atlantic 
alienation is caused by differing religious perceptions. 

But here, too, Europe may well be in for some change. Many Europeans are asking 
whether their secular societies are not in need of more religion. In light of 
the growing problems of the modern welfare state and rampant materialism, those 
advocating metaphysical restoration seem to be on the rise. For them, more 
religion is the answer to widespread nihilism in European societies. 

Ronald Meinardus is resident representative of the Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation 
in the Philippines. Send comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

The Japan Times: Dec. 2, 2004
(C) All rights reserved 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/BRUplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

***************************************************************************
Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg 
Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. www.ppi-india.uni.cc
***************************************************************************
__________________________________________________________________________
Mohon Perhatian:

1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik)
2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari.
3. Lihat arsip sebelumnya, www.ppi-india.da.ru; 
4. Posting: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Kirim email ke