Beware of Muslim Neo-Cons and
Rand Robots
By Tahir Ali*
Massachusetts
For the last three years, the
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has been
telling Muslims all over the world: You either
have to have a war within or a war with us. A
call for Muslim “civil war” has become
the battle cry of the neo-cons. Using these “civil
wars”, Muslims killing Muslims in large
numbers, the neo-cons expect to accomplish three
goals: 1) recreation of Muslim
societies in Western image, with or without democratic
institutions, 2) long-term control
over oil and policies toward Israel, and 3)
reconstruction of Islam on Biblical model, reformation
included.
In 2003, the Rand Corporation, a semi-autonomous
think tank, had issued a report titled Civil Democratic
Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies authored
by Cheryl Benard. The American Muslims must take
note of because it is already being implemented
in “letter and spirit” by various
agencies and even “private” groups.
Though the author of this report claims: “The
United States has three goals in regard to politicized
Islam. First, it wants to prevent the spread of
extremism and violence. Second, in doing so, it
needs to avoid the impression that the United
States is ‘opposed to Islam.’ And
third, in the longer run, it must find ways to
help address the deeper economic, social, and
political causes feeding Islamic radicalism and
to encourage a move toward development and democratization”,
its actual aims are discernable from its policy
recommendations detailed below.
Cheryl Bernard, the author of this report, claims:
“This approach seeks to strengthen and foster
the development of civil, democratic Islam and
of modernization and development. It provides
the necessary flexibility to deal with different
settings appropriately, and it reduces the danger
of unintended negative effects. The following
outline describes what such a strategy might look
like:
1) “Support the modernists
first, enhancing their vision of Islam over that
of the traditionalists by providing them with
a broad platform to articulate and disseminate
their views. They, not the traditionalists, should
be cultivated and publicly presented as the face
of contemporary Islam.
2) “Support the secularists
on a case-by-case basis.
3) “Encourage secular civic
and cultural institutions and programs.
4) “Back the traditionalists
enough to keep them viable against the fundamentalists
(if and wherever those are our choices) and to
prevent a closer alliance between these two groups.
5) “Within the traditionalists,
we should selectively encourage those who are
the relatively better match for modern civil society.
For example, some Islamic law schools are far
more amenable to our view of justice and human
rights than are others.
6) “Finally, oppose the
fundamentalists energetically by striking at vulnerabilities
in their Islamic and ideological postures, exposing
things that neither the youthful idealists in
their target audience nor the pious traditionalists
can approve of: their corruption, their brutality,
their ignorance, the bias and manifest errors
in their application of Islam, and their inability
to lead and govern.” (P. 47-48)
After making these recommendations the author
goes on the say: “Some additional, more-direct
activities will be necessary to support this overall
approach, such as the following:
1) “Help break the fundamentalist
and traditionalist monopoly on defining, explaining,
and interpreting Islam.
2) “Identify appropriate
modernist scholars to manage a website that answers
questions related to daily conduct and offers
modernist Islamic legal opinions.
3) “Encourage modernist
scholars to write textbooks and develop curricula.
4) “Publish introductory
books at subsidized rates to make them as available
as the tractates of fundamentalist authors.
5) “Use popular regional
media, such as radio, to introduce the thoughts
and practices of modernist Muslims to broaden
the international view of what Islam means and
can mean.” (p. 48)
Three key factors are crystal clear about this
report: 1) The author of this report, Bernard,
seeks to redefine Islam, 2) find and promote Muslim
leaders and intellectuals of their choice, and
3) involve Western governments in reorganizing
and transforming Islam; by persuasion, when possible,
and by force, when necessary.
The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
Notwithstanding the fact that this report clearly
violates the First Amendment, since its publication
in 2003, various groups and organizations have
put Cheryl Benard’s recommendations into
action. A number of Muslims have been co-opted
by neo-cons and by various Rand Report implementation
teams.
Though it is true that people under assault can
always tell the difference between a Nelson Mandela
and a Chief Buthalazi, even if the powers-that-be
may label Mandela as a “terrorists”
and Zulu Chief Buthalazi as the “moderate”,
it is still useful even necessary to remain vigilant
about these planted agents who are now being programmed
like robots to say and to whatever these think
tanks want them to say and do.
How can one recognize these Muslim neo-cons and
these Rand Robots? Well here are a few hints:
1. Their assignment is to trigger
multiple civil wars. You will find them promoting
conflict among Muslims, by clever means of course.
2. You will find them attacking
any effort or entity promoting unity, clarity
of purpose, or Muslim self-empowerment. One of
their main assignments is to prevent emergence
of a unified American Muslim agenda.
3. You will find them inventing
clever methods to undermine and dilute Muslim
identity. Their job is to prod Muslims to participate
as individuals, not as a community.
4. You will find them using shrewd
slogans to get American Muslims to shed any all
support and affinity for issues and causes of
freedom justice in Palestine, Kashmir, and elsewhere.
Their assignment is to leave the field wide open
for the other side.
5. You will find them exploiting
every fault line within the American Muslim community.
For example, deploying every conceivable stratagem
to create misunderstanding and lack of amity among
indigenous and immigrant Muslims.
6. You will find them undermining
American Muslim struggle for civil right and human
liberties.
7. You will find them not only
refuting the neo-cons but actually working with
and for the neo-cons.
8. You will find them creating
confusion, hopelessness, helplessness, and purposeless
in the community. You will find them attacking
everyone else but never taking responsibility
for any cause or crisis.
9. Their ultimate assignment
is to undermine the American Muslim community
by undermining its primary values, its main ideas,
its representative institutions and its primary
modes of self-empowerment and self-representation.
What these Muslim neo-cons and Rand Robots are
seeking is not reform but intellectual and moral
surrender. However, there is one important difference
between Muslim neo-cons and Rand Robots: the Muslim
neo-cons do not attack Islam or Prophet of Islam,
the Rand Robots do.
Remember, in the war of wits, mind is the ultimate
target but mind is also the ultimate weapon.
· *Author of book ‘The Muslim
Vote Counts and Recounts’
------------------------------------------------------------------------
