Tragedies such as the recent mass killing by two Islamist extremists at the headquarters of the French satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo, has led some critics to argue that Islam is inherently violent. For a moment, let’s assume that they are right. How would a counterterrorism strategy look based on this view? Nearly one out of every four people on the planet identify themselves as Muslims. Not to mention that individuals adopt different religions all the time. Effectively fighting terrorism would be virtually impossible if people accepted the notion that belief in Islam caused violent behavior.
Where would one begin? Even if it were true that every known terrorist was a self-proclaimed Muslim, that does not mean that every self-proclaimed Muslim is a terrorist. Using a generalization as the basis of a counterterrorism strategy is impractical. Could there be more precise conditions beyond belief in Islam that lead to extremist behavior?
Maajid Nawaz certainly thinks so. He is a former member of an Islamist revolutionary group. Nawaz is currently the co-founder and chairman of Quilliam, a counter-extremism think tank. In an interview in 2012, Nawaz revealed the circumstances that resulted in his involvement with the extremist group. He stated that it was a combination of social grievances, an identity crisis, and a charismatic recruiter that offered a narrative that made sense of his adolescent angst. These are all somewhat manageable factors. Terrorism is a real threat. Embracing sweeping generalizations about Muslims only impedes our ability to combat it. Is Islam a violent religion? That is debatable. A better question is what differentiates a peaceful self-proclaimed Muslim from a violent one? The answer may get us one step closer to eradicating Islamist extremism.
—
I invite you to join me on Facebook and follow me on Twitter.
