Religion, Politics and
the Military in Today’s World
|
Georgios
Gartzonikas Hellenic Air Force Corresponding
address: Ampelokipi |
Dr. Joanne K. Lekea* Hellenic Airforce
Academy & National and Corresponding address: Melissia, 151 27 Phone Number: 0030-210-8035951,
0030-6972035616 E-mail address: ilekea@phs.uoa.gr , jlekea@hotmail.com |
Panagiotis
Michos Hellenic Air Force Corresponding
address: Amarynthos, Euboia E-mail
address: fandomduck@in.gr |
The main purpose of this work is to understand
the processes leading to the religious breakdown between east and west, as well
as the current form of terrorist activities. The idea of holy war has
definitely its roots in the past and we can only find its root causes and
understand its development over time by looking at the parameters that
determined it. Therefore, in order to understand the present, we need to take a
few steps back and look at the history of the relationships between the West
and Islam as a whole entity changing over time, without any time gaps.
In the current paper at the essence of the two
civilisations, East and West, that becomes the determinant of the personality
of their citizens and defines their identity, which in turn is the determent factor
for their relationships and conflicts. We look at this phenomenon by taking a
historical view at the Byzantine era – at the time of Crusades – that is the
start of the conflicts between the two civilisations.
Finally, we conclude with an insight in how the
meta-physical essence into which the two conflicting civilisations have arrived
can become the centre around which the personality of their citizens revolves.
We will try to analyse that by looking at fundamentalism, in its religious and
political extensions, the crusades in the west and martyrs in East, as well as
the meaning of martyrdom, in Islam that gives a meaning and covers current
terrorists, who conduct and justify their atrocities in the name of religion.
In this context, we examine the role and the impact of religion on the army’s
institutions, as well as the influential role military chaplains can play in
order to diminish the ideological differences between East and West.
Keywords: jihad, holy war, terrorism, Islam, fundamentalism
The
notion of Holy War in the Christian West was ideally expressed through the
crusades. The initial seeds of the idea of Holy War appeared in the West during
the 9th century, when death for religious causes during a fight started being
recognized as worthy of a holy reward. It seems that, the primary role in the
creation of a concept of holy war in the West was performed by the convention
of adoration. The adoration of the Holy Places had started concerning and
stirring Christians from the 4th century and ever since it went on incessantly
until the 11th century. Actually, by the end of 7th century, it was included in
regular penances and later on it was considered to be offering the possibility
of a self-regulating purification to those who were willing to be exposed to
the sufferings and dangers of such indications of religion. By 10th century,
the blessing of the pilgrim’s wand, who departed for
A crucial part for the creation of an
expedient climate, which resulted in the phenomenon of crusades, was performed
by the psychological agent as well. A series of calamities, like earthquakes,
floods, famines, which occurred during the 11th century, and the eschatological
traditions about the end of the world at the completion of the millennium,
created a religious effusion and a psychological condition that found a
resource on the way to
The declaration and the organization of the
holy war by the pope, meant that the leader of the Church had earned the status
of protector of the Church and had replaced the emperor in this position, which
was the aim of this reformative movement. Furthermore, through the crusades,
the papal Church had the opportunity to constrain the conflicts between
Christians so as to turn their war disposal (mainly the knights) towards the
struggle against the faithless, a thing which would benefit Christianity in
miscellaneous ways. This way, it gave a new meaning to the sense of knighthood,
for it combined the ideal of a warrior with that of a Christian who is fighting
for his faith.
Another motive for the
The crusades bear certain characteristics,
which we mention in short, because they’re the foundation for the comparison
between ideology and practical application in the conduct of the Christian holy
war in the West and the East:
a.
The aim of
the crusade is to defend the Churches of the East and help the Christians that
are persecuted by the faithless Muslims, to revenge for the insult that had
occurred towards God with the conquest of the land that belonged to them, to
punish them for the despoilment and destruction of temples and the persecution
of His believers. The liberation of
b. Holy war has a divine origin and is conducted
after a divine command for the reason that has just been mentioned.
c. The main exterior characteristic of the holy
war of the West is the symbol of the cross. The cross is ahead of the army and
is carried on the crusaders’ shoulders. The cross is signum salutis, it carries the salvation of the soul and victory.
d. The hope for salvation that is given by the
symbol of the cross is related to the promise for a forgiveness of sins.
e. Torment is another element of the holy war. The
crusader, who is killed or dies during the course, is recognized as a martyr,
as it is stated in epistles and chronicles.
f.
God
helps and protects true believers during the battle. For this reason, the
purification of the warriors is essential before every battle. This is obtained
through litanies, prayers, fast, avowal (sometimes with Communion as well) and
charity.
g.
The
parallelism with images and situations from the Old Testament is another
particular characteristic of the crusades. The crusaders’ campaign in the Holy
Places is thought to portray the Israelite’s path towards the Promised Land.
h.
The
history of crusades is full of miracles, prophecies and predictions, just as it
is in the Old and New Testament.
i.
The
terminology of the crusades shows their immediate connection to adoration and
their divine descent, according to their contemporaries’ conception. The
crusaders are milites Christi, athletae
Christi, fideles Christi. For their enemies, the Christians use a certain
terminology as well, that has to do with the confrontation of their faith.
Thus, they usually call their enemies infideles,
gentiles, pagani. These
characterizations have also to do with religion: inimici Dei, satellites diaboli, satellites Antichristi. The
Christians are presented as God’s children, while the Muslims as Devil’s
children.
j.
The
crusade is mainly the Church’s issue. The pope, being a representative of God,
is the one who has the province to declare, organize and guide it.
k.
The
crusade is virtually an aggressive war from a military perspective, even though
in the sources it is presented as a defensive one.
l.
The corps
of saints and martyrs had become an object of worship by the first centuries of
Christianity. Adoration was thought to provide a greater moral completion if the
pilgrim managed on his way home to bring back some valuable phylactery from the
corps of a saint or martyr.
m.
In the
East, there was an early development towards the worshipping military saints.
Their worship, as it seems, was spread to the West during the 11th century and
before the first crusade. Their presence in the battlefield emphasizes the
religious character of the crusades.
The spread of religion in Islam is
parallel with the expansion of the state. This is because almost every
expression of public and private life (politics, justice, morals, social and
familiar behavior) is closely connected to religion and result from the Koran.
The Koran is a godsent book for the Muslims. In this we have the ‘revelation’
of God’s will through the prophet Mohamed and is, along with hadith (the traditions referring to the
actions and words of Mohamed) the basis of the religious, moral, legal and
political concepts that rule the lives of the Muslim world. In Islamic conscience,
there is no political thought which is independent of the religious one and
‘the purpose of the political life is determined by religion’.
The Koran teaches the believers that they
are the finest people on earth, the only ones who are marching to the road of
salvation and justice. These people haven’t got as a common characteristic the
tribe or social class, but religion. The faithful Muslims are those who
‘believed and accepted exile and tried with their fortunes and themselves for
God’s purposes’ irrelevantly of their racial or social background. This
subsumption, however, is meant not only as religious, but as political too and
the believers must pursue it by using all means, peaceful and violent, in order
to render Islam an international religion and an international state. The
achievement of this goal demands for incessant and hard effort and a lot of
time. For this reason, until its ultimate fulfillment, the Islamic notion
divides the world in two areas, the ‘area of Islam’ (dar al-Islam) and the ‘area of war’ (dar al-harb). In the first area belong all those territories that
are under the Muslim law and are inhabited by Muslims, congenital or after a
reversal and by non-Muslims who belong to communities of permissible religions.
The second area includes all those countries that are out of the Islamic law
and are inhabited by faithless. Islam’s immutable target is to vanish the ‘area
of war’, to subsume it to the Islamic law, to convert the entire world in an
‘area of Islam’ and unite it under the same religious and political power.
Thus, the ‘area of Islam’ is in an incessant state of war against the ‘area of
war’, until it incorporates with Islam.
The
instrument that is used for a global conversion to an ‘area of Islam’ is jihad, the ‘holy war’, the only war
recognized by the Islamic law, for it is fair and sacred at the same time.
Jihad was fair and ‘holy war’ which turned against the faithless. Through ‘holy
war’ Islam defeats all threatening enemies, interior and exterior:
Fight against those who don’t believe in God…until they pay homage
through voluntary homage, and they feel humiliated. [Koran (9) 29]
In exchange, Islam offered them ‘security’
and ‘protection’ of their lives and fortunes, the ability to act out their
religious duties and some legislative and judicial autonomy. The term jihad
derives from the verb djihada, which,
according to its grammatical variants, has multiple interpretations: make an
effort, work eagerly, torture, annoy, struggle, fight, battle, conduct holy war,
and fight against the faithless or heretics. Literally, the term jihad means
the effort taken for a specific action. This can be spiritual, and aim at a
moral and religious perfection after the destruction of temptations and senses,
but at the same time a physical perfection, as stated by the divinization of
the fight, the ‘war at the course of God’, for religion’s sake. The Koran and
Hadith are usually used with this second meaning. Many believe that the
‘greatest’ and most difficult jihad is the spiritual one, while the physical is
of less importance, inferior, because visible enemies are fought more easily
than the invisible ones. According to Muslim jurals jihad can be conducted in
four ways: with the heart, language, hands and sword. The first way expresses
the spiritual, ‘greater’ jihad. With the second we have the defense of law and
fighting off the injustice, the third and fourth are to conduct war against the
faithless. Generally, jihad is connected to military action as an individual
and collective duty of the Islamic community.
As long as jihad refers to the effort for a
moral and spiritual perfection through the fighting off of temptations, this is
an individual obligation. But, when it comes to physical effort, to the war ‘on
the grounds of Allah’, this obligation becomes collective and concerns the
entire community, and it is asserted by the state and through it by God who has
the ultimate power. Participation in jihad is obligatory for all men, as long
as they correspond to certain requirements: they are faithful, spiritually and
physically healthy, economically independent, with no debts and with a
sufficient fortune so as to provide for themselves and their families, to have their parents’
permission (with the exception of certain occasions of sudden attacks from the
enemies). When they take part in jihad they must be obedient and faithful to
their commander, honest and outright. The most important requirement is the
purpose of their participation in a holy war, which must be kind and unselfish.
Such a purpose is the defense of religion and the communication of God’s words
to the faithless, and not the demonstration of courage and the obtainment of
glory. The weak, the sick, the disabled, the poor, the slaves, the children,
the old and the women are released from their obligations to jihad. The latter
just help during the fight by taking care of the injured men, caring them and
the dead, offering water to the fighters and encouraging them. Only in case of
a sudden attack are they obliged to fight.
Those who fight in the ‘course of God’
enjoy spiritual and material benefits. ‘Heaven’s doors are under the veil of
the sword’ and they are open to those who take part in the holy war, on
condition that their participation is due to their faith and not the pursuit of
earthly benefits. They themselves are recognized as martyrs, if they are killed
while they are fighting, they enter straight to heaven. Their place next to
Allah is superior to that of the other ‘residents’ of heaven and their graves
are distinguished from the graves of the rest of the believers by the sword
that is shining on them. So, the consecration of war is quite obvious, as long
as it is conducted for the religion’s and God’s sake. The warriors of jihad
ensure, except for heaven, a participation in spoils of war. If they are killed
during a battle, their share is given to their heirs.
Jihad is the instrument with which
Islam was pursuing the conversion of the ‘area of war’ into an ‘area of Islam’.
Thus, holy war wasn’t an end in itself, but only the medium for the achievement
of the goal. So, if this goal could be obtained peacefully, there was no reason
for a war. The Muslims were obliged, before the hostilities began, to invite
the faithless to embrace Islam. If they accepted, there was no reason to fight.
This ‘invitation’ always had to precede the declaration of war to give the
enemy the possibility of choice between Islam and peace or war. If the enemy
rejected this alternative, a war was declared. Jihad is a continuous obligation
that will vanish only when the entire area is subsumed in Islam. From what has
been mentioned, we can see the offensive nature of physical jihad, of jihad as
a holy war, since it aims at an international prevalence of the Islamic law.
When Muslims wage war for the dissemination of
Islam, it is a just war: ‘Fight for the sake of Allah against those who fight
against you but do not be violent because Allah does not love aggressors’
(al-Baqara 2:190)…Kill them wherever you find them. Drive them out of places
from which they drove you…Fight against them until idolatry is no more and
Allah’s religion reigns supreme’ (al-Baqara 2:190-92); when non-Muslims attack
Muslims, it is an unjust war: "Fight for the cause of Allah... how
could you not fight for the cause of Allah?...True believers
fight for the cause of Allah, but the infidels fight for idols" (al-Nisa' 4:74-76)[1].
When it comes
to the conduct of war, one finds only small differences between Islam and other
monotheistic religions or the international laws of war. Islam recognizes moral
constraints on military conduct, even in wars against non-Muslims. As in other
traditions, two categories of restrictions can be distinguished: restrictions
on weapons and methods of war, and restrictions on permissible targets. And,
just as other traditions sometimes permit these constraints to be set aside in
extreme situations: ‘Necessity overrides the forbidden’. This precept allows
moral constraints to be overridden in emergencies, though the criteria for
determining whether an emergency exists are vague.
The Koran asks
believers to honor their promises and agreements: ‘Keep faith with Allah, when
you make a covenant… Do not break your oaths’ (al-Nahl 16:19). And: ‘Those who
keep faith with Allah do not break their pledge’ (al-Ra’d 13:19). It also
prescribes that the enemy be notified before an attack. Finally, regarding
permissible targets of war, Koran is strictly prohibiting the targeting of
children, women and the elderly. Consistent with this prohibition, as well as
with the pre-Islamic tribal belief that it is not a sign of honor for a man to
demonstrate his power to someone who is weaker, is the precept that prisoners
be fairly treated (al-Insan 76:8-9). And because the goal of war against
unbelievers is to force them to submit to Islam, not to destroy them, the rules
of war forbid plundering and destruction.
3. Martyrs
in Islam and Christianity
The expression
'martyrdom' has had a strange destiny in Islam. In the Koran, the word means
bearing witness and not dying a holy death. It was, in all probability, after
the Muslim conquest of
In
Christianity, acceptance of holy death was an act of witness testifying
before men to the sincerity of one's faith before God and to the
righteousness of the cause. The same twin meanings can be found in
Islam. The Muslim shahid does, however, differ from the Christian martyr
in one fundamental respect. In Christianity, death results from
the Christian's refusal to obey the will of a powerful figure who
wants to impose his religion upon him. The Christian does not seek to inflict
death upon the Roman pagan who wishes him to foreswear his faith. He
simply denies him the right to force him to go against the precepts of his
religion. In the case of Islam, martyrdom is a death resulting from the fight
against the enemy of the religion of Allah. It is dying for the cause of
God that leads to the
believer's death as a martyr: 'Whoever fights for the cause of God, whether he dies or triumphs, on him We shall
bestow a rich recompense' (IV: 74).
In Christianity, the physical
violence comes from those who hold authority and the Christian does not react with
equivalent violence; in Islam, the fight against the enemies of Allah is
characterised by legitimate violence, and one can slay or be slain. The enemy
is not accorded any privilege and is not allowed to strike with impunity. If God's
warrior slays, he will be rewarded by God; if he is slain, he has his place in
1. One who fights
for the cause of God, has immense merit.
2. One who dies in the course of
the fight is a martyr and will go to
3. Martyrdom is the
non-intentional result of death on the field of battle (or in similar circumstances)
at the hand of an enemy.
4. The ideal type of martyrdom
involves an active commitment on the part of the Muslim.
5. Unlike
Christianity, Islam does not renounce the use of physical violence against an enemy.
4. Τhe
wider trend of religious terrorism
Between the
mid-1960’s and the mid-1990’s, the number of fundamentalist movements of all
religious affiliations tripled worldwide. Simultaneously, there has been a
virtual explosion of identifiable religious terrorist groups from none in 1968
to today’s level, where nearly a quarter of all terrorist groups active
throughout the world are predominantly motivated by religious concerns. Unlike
their secular counterparts, religious terrorists are, by their very nature,
largely motivated by religion, but they are also driven by day-to-day practical
political considerations within their context-specific environment. This makes
it difficult to separate and distinguish between the political and religious sphere
of these terrorist groups.
Nowhere is this clearer than in Muslim
terrorist groups, as religion and politics cannot be separated in Islam. For
example, Hizb’Allah or Hamas operate within the framework of religious
ideology, which they combine with practical and precise political action in
The growth of religious terrorism is also
indicative of the transformation of contemporary terrorism into a method of
warfare and the evolution of the tactics and techniques used by
various groups, as a reaction to vast changes within the local, regional and
global environment over the last three decades. These changes can be seen in
numerous incidents, from the spate of hijackings by secular Palestinian
terrorists and the mayhem of destruction caused by left- and right-wing
domestic terrorists throughout
A survey of the major religious
terrorist groups in existence worldwide in the 1990s would reveal that
almost all experience a serious sense of crisis in their environment, which has
led
to an increase in the number of groups recently formed and caused an escalation
in their activities. This crisis in the religious terrorist's milieu is
multifaceted in the social, political, economic, cultural,
psychological and spiritual sphere. Yet, this sense of crisis, as a perceived threat to their identity and
survival, has been present to varying
degrees throughout history. In these
cases, the believers use the religion in a variety of ways: they take refuge in
the religion, which provides centuries-old ideals by which to determine goals; they find physical or psychological
sanctuary against repression; or they may
use it as a major instrument for activism or political action. Thus, religious
terrorists perceive their actions as defensive and reactive in character and
justify them in this way. Islam's jihad, for example, is essentially a
defensive doctrine, religiously sanctioned by leading Muslim theologians, and
fought against perceived aggressors, non-believers. In its most violent form,
it is justified as a means of last resort to prevent the extinction of the distinctive identity of the
Islamic community against the forces of secularism and modernism.
Almost all the contemporary
terrorist groups have a
distinct religious imperative. As such, the militant extremists' decisions to
organize, break away or remain on the fringe are, to a large extent,
conditioned by the political context within which they operate. Their decisions
are shaped by doctrinal differences, tactical and local issues, and the degree of
threat that they perceive secularization poses to their cause. This threat of
secularization may come either from within the movements themselves and the
environment within which they come into contact, or from outside influences. If
the threat is external, it may amplify their sense of marginality within, and
acute alienation from, society. It may also fuel the need to compensate
for personal sufferings through the radical transformation of the ruling order.
The internal threat of secularization is often manifest in a vociferous and virulent
rejection of the corrupt political parties, the legitimacy of the regime, and also the lackluster and inhibited character of the existing religious
establishment. Thus, religious terrorism serves as the only effective vehicle
for violent political opposition.
The religious terrorist
groups' perception of a threat of secularization from within the same society
is also manifest in the symbolism used in the selection of their names,
indicating that they have an absolute monopoly of the revealed truth by God. It
is, therefore, not surprising that some of the most violent terrorist groups
over the last decade have also adopted names accordingly: Hizb'allah
(Party of God), Aum Shinrikyo (The Supreme Truth) and Jund al-Haqq (Soldiers of
Truth). These names also endow them with religious legitimacy, historical
authenticity, and justification for their actions in the eyes of their
followers and potential new recruits. They also provide valuable insight
into their unity of purpose, direction and degree of militancy,
with names like Jundallah (Soldiers of God), Hamas (Zeal), Eyal (Jewish
Fighting Organization) and Le Groupe Islamique du Arme (Armed Islamic Group,
GIA) which promises unabated struggle and sacrifice.
The threat of
secularization from foreign sources is also the catalyst for springing religious
terrorists into action. Intrusion of secular values into the extremist's own
environment and the
visible presence of secular foreign interference provoke self-defensive aggressiveness and hostility against the sources
of these evils. This is especially true against colonialism and neo-colonialism by western civilizations or against
other militant religious faiths.
These defensive sentiments are often combined with the visible emergence and
presence of militant clerical
leaders. Such leaders have more activist and militant ideologies than the mainstream movement from which they have
emerged as either clandestine instruments or breakaway groups. It is often the
case that these clerical ideologues and personalities act as a centrifugal force in attracting support, strengthening
the organizational mechanisms and in
redefining the methods and means through terrorism. At the same time, they provide theological justification, which enables
their followers to pursue the sacred causes more effectively and rapidly. The
so-called spiritual guides, who ultimately overlook most political and military activities while blessing acts of
terrorism, can be found in almost all
religious terrorist groups. Examples include Hizb'allah's Sheikh Fadlallah and
Hamas' Sheikh Yassin, the militant Sikh leader Sant Bhindranwale and Aum
Shinrikyo's leader, Shoko Ashara.
In many ways, religious
terrorists embrace a total ideological vision of an all-out struggle to resist
secularization from within as well as from without. They pursue this vision in
totally uncompromising holy terms in literal battles between good and evil. A xenophobia
against everything alien or secular which must be removed from
the entire land, and a vehement rejection of western culture. This distinction between the
faithful and those standing outside the group is reinforced in the daily discourse of the
clerics of these terrorist groups. The clerics' language and phraseology shapes
the
followers' reality, reinforcing the loyalty and social obligation of the
members to the group
and reminding them of the sacrifices already made, as well as the direction of
the struggle. In this task,
many religious terrorist groups draw heavily upon religious symbolism and
rituals to reinforce the sense of collectiveness. Examples of this emphasis on collectivity
include the local reputation of the fighters of the underground military wing
of Hamas,
famous for never surrendering to arrest, the growth of Hamas martyrology, which
lionizes
martyrs with songs, poems and shrines, and the frequent symbolic burning and desecration
of Israeli and American flags by several Islamic groups across the
The sense of
totality of the struggle for these religious warriors is one purely defined in
dialectic and cosmic terms as believers against unbelievers, order against
chaos, and justice against injustice, which is mirrored in the totality and
uncompromising nature of their cause. As such, the religious terrorists
perceive their struggle as all-out war against their enemies. This perception,
in turn, is often used to justify the level and intensity of the violence. For
example, this theme of war is continuously detectable in the writings and
statements by the terrorists, as exemplified by by Article 8 of Hamas'
manifesto justifying that jihad is its path and that "[d]eath
for the sake of Allah is its most sublime belief."
Religious terrorism also offers
its’ increasingly suffering and impatient constituents more hope and a greater chance
of vengeance against the sources of their historical grievances than
they would otherwise have. Violent acts give these groups a sense of
power that is disproportionate to their size. The basis for this feeling of
power is enhanced by a strategy of anonymity by the religious terrorist which
confuses the enemy. The perpetrators adeptly exploit this fear by invoking
religious symbolism, such as the release of videotaped images of an endless
pool of suicide bombers, ready to be dispatched against new targets. Religious extremists are unconstrained in the
lethality and the indiscriminate nature of violence used, as it is
conducted and justified in defense of the faith and the community. In fact, the
lack of any moral constraints in the use of violence cannot only be attributed to the
totality of the struggle itself but also to the preponderance of recruits of
young, educated and newly-urbanized men (often with very radical, dogmatic, and
intolerant world-views), in contemporary religious terrorist organizations.
While
the resort to martyrdom by certain groups can be explained by the heightened
sense of threat to the groups and their causes within their own environment, it
can also be explained
by an increasing level of internationalization between groups both in terms of contact, similarity of causes and as examples
of strategies. This is particularly evident among Muslim terrorist groups.
For example, many Algerian, Egyptian and Palestinian Muslim extremists have
participated alongside the Mujahadin fighters in the
Yet, the mechanisms of
unleashing acts of religious terrorism, in terms of intensity, methods and
timing, are tightly controlled by the apex of the clerical hierarchy and most often
dependent on their blessing. In most cases the strictly hierarchical nature of
religious terrorist groups with a highly disciplined structure and
obedient cadres means not only that the main clerical leaders command full
control over the political as well as military activities of the organization,
but also that the strategies of terrorism are unleashed in accordance with general
political directives and agendas. Yet, the use and sanctioning of religious violence
requires clearly defined enemies. The identity of the enemy and the decision to
use religious violence against them are dependent on, and shaped by, the
heightened degree of the sense of crisis threatening their faiths and
communities. Internally, this militancy may be directed against the corruption or injustices of
the political system, or against other religious communities; externally, it
may be focused against foreign influences, which represent a cultural,
economic, or political threat to the respective religious communities.
In comparison to their secular counterparts,
the religious terrorists have not been particularly inventive when it comes to
using new types of weaponry in their arsenals, instead relying on the
traditional bombs and bullets. Yet the religious terrorists have demonstrated a
great deal of ingenuity in terms of the tactics used in the selection of means,
methods and timing of violence to cause maximum effect. They have utilized the
notion of martyrdom and self-sacrifice through suicide bombings as a means of
last resort against their conventionally more powerful enemies. While few
terrorist groups adopt large-scale campaigns of suicide missions, the religious
terrorist utilizes the traditional methods of assassination, kidnappings,
hijackings, and bombings in a skilful combination in alignment with the current
political context on the local, regional, and international level. Despite the
growth and array of religious terrorist groups with diverse demands and grievances,
they are all united not only in the level and intensity of violence used, but
also in the role played by religious symbolism in selecting the targets and the
timing of the violence itself.
Many of these terrorist groups are
compelled to undertake operations with a distinct political agenda for
organizational reasons to release imprisoned members or eliminating opponents.
Nonetheless, the targets are almost always symbolic and carefully selected to
cause maximum psychological trauma to the enemy and to boost the religious
credentials of the terrorist group
among their own followers. This is clearly evident from the selection by Muslim
terrorists of western embassies, airlines, diplomats and tourists abroad as
symbolically striking at the heart of their oppressors. Finally, the timing of the violence by religious
terrorists is carefully selected to coincide with their own theological requirements or to
desecrate their enemies' religious holidays and sacred moments.
5. Conclusions-The role of
military chaplains.
This paper has
sought to demonstrate that, contrary to popular belief, the nature and scope of religious
terrorism is anything but disorganized or random but rather driven by an inner
logic common among diverse groups and faiths who use political violence to
further their sacred causes. The resort to terrorism by religious imperative is also
not a new phenomenon, but rather deeply embedded in the history and
evolution of the faiths. Religions have gradually served to define the
causes and the enemies as well as the means, methods and timing of the
violence itself. As such, the virtual explosion of religious terrorism in
recent times is part and parcel of a gradual process of what can be likened to
neo-colonial liberation struggles. This process has trapped religious
faiths within meaningless geographical and political boundaries and
constraints, and has been accelerated by grand shifts in the global
political, economic, military and socio-cultural setting, compounded by
difficult local indigenous conditions for the believers.
The
uncertainty and unpredictability in the present environment as the world
searches for a new world order, amidst an increasingly complex
global environment with ethnic and nationalist conflicts, provide many
religious terrorist groups with the opportunity and the ammunition to shape
history according to their divine duty, cause, and mandate while it indicates for
others that the end of time itself is near. As such, it is imperative
to move away from treating this new religious force in global politics as a
monolithic entity but rather seek to understand the inner logic of these individual groups
and the mechanisms that produce terrorism in order to undermine their breeding
ground and strength, as they are here to stay.
Bearing these
in mind, the role of military chaplains can be very important in helping
soldiers realize the enemy’s deeper beliefs. It is well known that during a
war, soldiers face various dilemmas concerning the treatment of their enemies.
Here are some relevant questions that came into play when asymmetrical warfare
and terrorism rose: why terrorists choose to attack non-combatants? Does this
mean that their culture does not respect certain moral dimension during
hostilities? If this is case, are we obliged to protect from unnecessary harm
such an enemy and his population? Military chaplains during their contact with
soldiers or by preparing and forwarding informative material can help people in
the army to comprehend and respect the differences among different religions.
They can show us that except for the differences, important similarities exist
as well. But the most important is that they can teach, perhaps with their own
example, that mutual understanding, respect and love among people is crucial,
even if we do not all share and credit the same beliefs.
NOTES
* The author
acknowledges funding support for this work from “Pythagoras” project, which is
co-financed from Op. Education through ESF (European Social Fund) and National
Resources.
[1] Present-day
Islamic fundamentalist groups—groups whose programs are based on the revival of Islamic values—often invoke the idea of jihad to
legitimize their political agendas. The reason for
this misuse of the concept is simple: most fundamentalists are
lay people who lack intimate knowledge of Islamic
sources and who politicize Islam to justify their activities. Before
the Gulf War, for example, this occurred in