The recent terrorist attacks in Paris have shocked everyone. Terror and violence of any kind carried out on any ethnicity is fiercely condemned by every country that wishes for peace and security in the world. The attacks claimed the lives of many civilians and left hundreds of families and friends in mourning. In the wake of such horrific incidents, while it is understandable for the public to be swayed by emotional reactions, the governments on the other hand are required to keep a cool head and make responsible and rational decisions in order to ease tension and prevent further damage. Yet, this has rarely been the case so far. With ISIL terrorists claiming affinity to Islam, Muslims in the US and Europe are beginning to feel alienated, met with hostile stares and even targeted in religiously-motivated hate crimes.
Islamophobia and xenophobia are also being whipped up by US Republican presidential candidates, with Donald Trump swearing to close all mosques and force American-Muslims to carry special ID cards, or Ben Carson referring to Syrian refugees as “rabid dogs.”
The situation made us reach out to Dr. Belinda F. Espiritu, an associate professor of communication and Coordinator of the Mass Communication Program of the University of the Philippines Cebu., who believes that ‘the predominantly negative media portrayal of Islam and Muslims needs to be balanced by widespread knowledge of peace-loving Muslims who pursue the path towards union of love and will with God’, as mentioned in her article on Islamophobia.
What follows is the text of her interview with Mehr News Agency:
No one called Israel’s attack on Gaza ‘Judaic terrorism’, because that would have been anti-Semitic and wrong. But people are encouraged by western media to call ISIL ‘Islamic terrorism’, while the terrorist group has nothing to do with teachings of Islam, particularly the fact that Quran advocates only defensive war. Firstly, what possible objectives are the ISIL terrorists pursuing by using Islam as a cover for committing their heinous acts? And secondly, how effective do you think western media and governments have been in distorting the general opinion about Islam and why are they doing this? What will they gain by turning Western people against Islam?
The nature of ISIL is something I can’t vouch to completely and certainly know, but based on a few articles from independent media that I’ve read regarding ISIL, it is an organization funded by CIA and other NATO countries in particular for military-industrial profits and expansion in oil-rich Middle-East. Questions come to my mind like “Is ISIL sincere in its objective in desiring to establish an Islamic Caliphate, or is it just using this as a cover for the intentions of those funding it? Are those recruited to become members of ISIL aware of the intentions of their funders or are they oblivious to their real intentions?” I heard from Dr. Chossudovsky that those recruited to become ISIL members are the renegades and delinquents of societies. Is the ISIL an organization created by the CIAs but has become a monster gone loose like the Talibans of Afghanistan?
Western media and governments have been quite effective in distorting the general opinion about Islam. They could be doing this because of their aversion to what stands antithetical to Western way of life and ideologies, particularly the capitalist lifestyle adopted by Western societies. What they can gain by turning Western people against Islam is the promotion of capitalism and Western ideologies and lifestyle and the maintenance of the Western hegemony all over the world, including the Middle Eastern world with its rich oil resources.
The House recently passed a bill that would suspend the program allowing Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the US. Some 50 Democrats have also joined a great number of Republicans in favor of the bill. While President Obama has promised to veto the legislation, calling the move ‘hysteric’ and based on ‘an exaggeration of risks’, what do you think would most likely become of the US refugee program and how will it affect the lives of refugees should the US government shut down over them?
We still have to see whether President Obama will really keep his word or not when he promised to veto this legislation. With the wariness against the infiltration of so-called “terrorists” among the Syrian refugees, the US refugee program would become threatened by this ‘exaggeration of risks’, as President Obama put it. The lives of refugees will become harder, calling for other nations to open their countries to come to the aid of the Syrians and other refugees to address this massive humanitarian crisis.
The Republican favorite for President, Donald Trump, has recently declared that he'd strongly consider shutting down mosques in the US and confirmed his plan to force all Muslims in the US to register on a database. Observers have drawn comparisons between his policy and Nazi Germany’s laws that required Jews to register. What are the consequences of xenophobia for a country which champions ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’?
The consequences of xenophobia for a country which champions ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’ with Donald Trump’s plans when he is elected as President would be disastrous. Such xenophobic moves would be in complete opposition to America’s championing of liberty. It would be completely against human rights and freedom of religion.
In a recent phone conversation with French President Francois Hollande, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani voiced the country’s readiness to extend security and intelligence cooperation with France in the fight against terror and violence. He maintained that the only way to root out terrorism is if all countries are truly united against it. Hollande has reportedly said that he would try to unite all countries for a military fight against ISIL. Just how realistic this plan is, considering the fact that there are a number of countries actually funding terrorism?
This question brings us to the question of whether terrorism is just staged or not. I am of the opinion that terrorism may both be funded and non-funded, staged and not staged. There could really be Muslims inclined to suicide bombing and violence, and there could be “terrorism” that is staged. Both could be happening. In my country, the Philippines, the Abu Sayyaf group, a group of Muslim bandits, is a terroristic group which kidnaps foreigners and Filipinos alike for huge monetary ransoms, beheads captives and rapes the captivated women. I am not saying that it is only Muslims who are capable of such things. Under the guise of separation of Church and state, those who profess to be Christians have done terroristic activities as well such as the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq and the unjust arrest and detention of suspected terrorists in Guantanamo Bay, among others.
If ISIL is just being used as a ploy by the NATO for its military-industrial expansion and its desire to control the Middle East and the whole world including its resources, Hollande’s plan to unite all countries for a military fight against ISIL is a form of deception. But if ISIL is a monster set loose, a group that has become uncontrollable by NATO itself, there may be a real reason for Hollande to seek unity to fight against it.
Observers believe that the reason ISIL managed to become so powerful is that the Americans and the Europeans chose allies – namely the Persian Gulf Arab states plus Israel – that ultimately fed this extremism which led the whole region moving towards destabilization. Now with Iran, as a serious and mighty opponent of terrorism, sitting at high-level Syria talks in Vienna for the first time, how will that change the equation in favor of stability in the region?
With Iran siding with NATO forces against terrorism, this means that Middle East has been divided and conquered. The Persian Gulf Arab states and Israel are allies of NATO, while other adjacent nations like Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and Syria have been destabilized. Saudi Arabia is an ally of America. North Africa is next to be destabilized. It appears that the Muslim population is placed under control, but the anti-West feelings are still brewing up and alliances among countries show the division of the world’s armies. China, Russia, and Syria are allies. America is allied with Israel, Turkey, Britain, France, and the Persian Gulf Arab states. The recent shooting of a Russian war plane by Turkey is a cause for alarm if Russia will retaliate against Turkey.
The western ‘anti-terrorism’ coalitions have come under a lot of criticism by regional states for not being serious in fighting terror. Can we actually say that the West, particularly the United States, is using terrorism as the rationale for the militarization of the country and to justify its military adventures abroad?
In the case of the Bush administration, the war on terror or terrorism itself was most certainly used for the militarization of America and as a justification of its military adventures abroad. I cannot for certain say that all terroristic activities are being used for the militarization of the West and as justification of its military adventures abroad because of my opinion that not all terroristic activities are staged. The Paris attacks may or may not have been staged. But if it was staged or deliberately done to appear that there were suicide attackers in Paris, then that would mean that the West was just using it as a pretext for its military adventures abroad.
Belinda F. Espiritu is an associate professor of communication and Coordinator of the Mass Communication Program of the University of the Philippines Cebu. She has conducted research in Turkey focusing on the writings of Osman Nuri Topbas and Bediuzzaman Said Nursi.
Interview by: Marjohn Sheikhi
Your Comment