Who is the ‘angry Muslim’ and why

“Brother, brother,” a young man called me as I hurriedly left a lecture hall in some community centre in Durban, South Africa.

That happened at the height of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, when all efforts at stopping the ferocious US-Western military drive against these two countries failed terribly.

The young man was dressed in traditional Afghan Pashtun attire and was accompanied by a friend of his.

With palpable nervousness, he asked a question that seemed completely extraneous to my lecture on the use of peoples’ history to understand protracted historical phenomena using Palestine as a model.

“Brother, do you believe that there is hope for the Muslim ummah,” he asked, referring to the future of a nation to which he believed we both indisputably belonged to, and anxiously awaited, as if my answer carried any weight at all and would put his evident worries at ease.

Perhaps more startling than his question was that I was not surprised in the least.

His was a question that generations of Muslim youth had been asking even before the decline and final collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the last standing Caliphate, by the end of World War I.

Despite major historical tumults, the caliphate had remained in consistent existence since the “rashidun caliphs” (the “rightly guided” caliphs), starting with Abu Bakr in 632 CE, following the death of Prophet Mohammad.

The young man’s questions summoned much history and a multitude of meanings. Few Western historians and “experts” (especially those who attempted to understand Islam for the sake of applying their knowledge for political and military purposes) can possibly fathom the emotional weight of that question.

“Ummah” in the young man’s question did not exactly mean “nation”, in the relatively modern nationalistic sense.

Muslims are not a race, but of several races; they do not share a skin colour, a life style per se or a common language even if Arabic is the original language of the Holy Koran.

Ummah is a “nation” that is predicated on a set of ageless moral values, originated in the Koran, epitomised through the teachings and legacy (Sunnah) of Prophet Mohammed, and guided by ijtihad “diligence” — explained as the independent reasoning — of Muslim scholars (ulama) based on the Koran and Sunnah.

Naturally, the breakdown of the caliphate created a crisis with many dimensions.

There was the geographic breakdown of the Muslim ummah, although, despite the cultural and linguistic uniqueness of the various groups of that “nation”, the ummah always possessed overriding value-based political and societal frameworks.

Based on that old, but constantly revived, legacy (thus ‘ijtihad’), Muslims possessed their own equivalent to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Geneva Conventions, civil codes and much more starting nearly 14 centuries ago.

What was more consequential than the geographic breakdown of the ummah was the collapse of the very fabric of society, the disintegration of the laws that governed every individual or collective relationship, every commercial transaction, rules regarding the environment, charity, the law of war and so on.

Another dissolution that took place was that of the authentic and organic moral values that allowed the ummah to persist as many empires failed, and flourish while others decayed.

The organic, self-propelled system was replaced by alternatives that deteriorated to the very last one.

And that is where the roots of the “angry Muslim” began.

The ummah continues to live as an ideal that transcends time and place. It persists despite the fact that the last century took an incredible toll on all Muslim nations, without exception.

Even the success of many nations in gaining independence from the very colonial powers that brought the caliphate down failed to tackle the original crisis of the once predominant, all-encompassing Muslim ummah.

Colonised Muslim societies eventually adopted the rules and laws of their former colonisers and continued to vacillate within their sphere of influence.

Post-independence Muslim nations were a hideous mix of tribalism and cronyism with a self-serving interpretation of Islam and Western laws, and civil codes that were carefully tailored to ensure the survival of an utterly corrupt system of governance where local rulers had assured supremacy over defeated, disoriented collectives, and Western powers sustained their interests by all means necessary.

Expectedly, such a situation could not possibly be sustained.

A strong and cohesive civil society had no chance of survival under oppressive regimes, and with the lack of education or opportunity, or both, generations of Muslims endured in utter despair.

As an escape from their immediate woes, many Muslims sought inspiration elsewhere.

They saw in Palestine a rally cry, for the resistance to foreign occupation was a symbolic indication of a collective pulse.

The wide support Hizbollah (a Shiite group) received from Sunni Muslims for its resistance to Israel was an indication that sectarian divides dwarfed when compared to the need for the Muslim ummah to regroup around principles, like justice, thus reclaiming even if only an iota of its past glory.

But it was the US-led Western invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq that drew the battle lines like never before.

When Baghdad fell in April 2003, and as American soldiers so conceitedly drowned the once capital of the Abbasid Caliphate with their flags, many Muslims felt that their ummah had reached the lowest depths of humiliation.

And while Iraqi men and women were being tortured, raped and filmed dead or naked by smirking US soldiers in Baghdad’s prisons, a whole new nation of angry Muslim youth was on the rise.

Western wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not the exclusive triggers of Muslim youth anger, humiliation and the violence that is now under way in Syria, Iraq and other Muslim countries.

The wars were the catalyst.

Picture a group of “foreign jihadists”, as they are called, sharing a meal between battles somewhere in northern Iraq and imagine what they possibly have in common: an Iraqi tortured in Bucca, a Lebanese who fought the Israelis in south Lebanon, a Syrian whose family was killed in Aleppo, and so on.

But it is not only a Middle Eastern question.

The alienation and constant targeting of French and British Muslim immigrants, their mosques, their cultures, languages, their very identity, coupled with the plight of Muslims everywhere could, too, have its own violent manifestation.

British Prime Minister David Cameron is worried about the threat to the security of his country as a result of the ongoing strife in Iraq, instigated by territorial gains of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

He does not seem to understand, or care to understand, his country’s role in the violence.

US President Barack Obama continues to preach from the White House about violence and the moral responsibility of his country, as if the destructive and leading role played by Washington in the Middle East were completely removed from the state of hopelessness and humiliation felt by a generation of Muslim youth.

It is as if war, foreign occupation and the systematic destruction of entire civilisation — still referred to by many Muslims as an ummah — will come at no price other than the fluctuating oil prices.

Who are these jihadists?

Many continue to ask and persistently attempt to offer answers.

CIA agents? Gulf-funded terrorist groups? Misguided youth sent by an Iranian conspiracy to justify its appetite for regional hegemony? Foreign jihadists fighting against the Assad regime in Syria?  Or perhaps with the Assad regime against his opposition?

Conspiracy theories thrive in time of great mysteries.

However, the alienated “angry” Muslim youth is hardly a mystery. It is a fully comprehensible historical inevitability.

For many of them, even if they insist otherwise, the ummah and caliphate are an escape into history from poverty, alienation, oppression and foreign occupations.

To understand that, it is truly necessary to tackle the roots of violence.

Ignoring it is not an option. 

The writer, a PhD scholar in people’s history at the University of Exeter, is the managing editor of Middle East Eye, an internationally syndicated columnist, a media consultant, an author and the founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London). He contributed this article to The Jordan Times.