Islamic Fundamentalism: What It Really Is and Why It Frightens the West

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM: _______ WHAT IT REALLY IS AND WHY IT FRIGHTENS THE WEST Shireen T. Hunter k3ince the Islamic revolution in Iran the West has viewed the phenomenon of Islamic fundamentalism as the greatest threat to its interests in the Muslim world, especially in the Middle East. The experiences of Iran and Lebanon stand as vivid evidence. Yet few observers in the West understand that the movement's threat does not derive from its Islamic or fundamentalist quality but from its militant and revolutionary nature, which is bent on changing the present balance of global economic and political power. Viewed in this way Islamic fundamentalism resembles other Third World militant movements, such as Nasserism, Ba'athism, Arab socialism, and other variants of socialist ideology. It also resembles the militant nonalignment movement and the forces that campaigned during the 1970s for a new international economic order. These groups are characterized by a similar worldview and understanding of the present international political system. Despite certain differences, all these mass movements share the following beliefs: (1) the present international system is bipolar and dominated by the two superpowers; (2) the superpowers and their allies exploit the Third World countries economically and dominate them politically and culturally; (3) the roots of the Third World's problems lie in the legacy of colonialism and neocolonialism; (4) Third World countries are economically, politically, and culturally dependent on the superpowers and their allies; (5) the superpowers and their allies perpetuate this state of Shireen T. Hunter is deputy director ofthe Middle East Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University. 189 190 SAIS REVIEW dependency by the intermediation of corrupt Third World elites; and (6) if the Third World's problems are to be solved, the corrupt ruling elites must be eliminated and indigenous means found to end the state of political, economic, and cultural dependence. The only difference between Islamic fundamentalism and other militant Third World movements is that the former, having sprung up in the Muslim world, is influenced by Islam and is expressed through Islamic symbolism. Yet this must not be mistaken for its primary motivating factor. In fact, many Islamic fundamentalists have absorbed popular Third World concepts ofthe international system, the role ofthe great powers, and the relationship between the Third World countries and the great powers. They are now expressing these concepts through Islamic symbols. The more secular among them often lapse into the use of common Third World terminology, such as colonialism, neocolonialism , dependency, self-reliance, and collective self-reliance. The Islamic fundamentalist movement shares another important trait with other Third World movements (including nationalist, anticolonial, and variants of socialist) in that it reflects a strong desire for independence and autonomy, including cultural autonomy. Animosity toward the West— which here does not exclude the Soviet Union—stems not from the fundamentalists' religious beliefs but from a perception that most of the Muslim world's problems derive from Western economic exploitation and political and cultural domination. The larger the extent of a great power's actual or perceived domination, the greater the fundamentalists' animosity toward it. From this perspective the United States is the principal source of evil, followed by the USSR. By contrast, the Western and Eastern Europeans are treated less harshly, despite their links with the superpowers and their own relatively superior power. The fundamentalists' goal is to end the Muslim world's state of dependency by eradicating Western and Soviet influence. This is the aspect of the movement that is ultimately threatening to Western interests. Yet the West has not paid enough attention to this aspect of the fundamentalist movement. Instead, relying on a series of misperceptions about the movement and the threat it poses, Western observers fall into the trap of simplistic, emotionally comforting interpretations or justifications . This will lead the West to ill-advised policies and jeopardize its relations with the Islamic world for a long time. Moreover, if the West does not correctly understand and come to terms with the fundamentalist movement, the challenges it poses will reemerge and confront the West in some other form in the future, even if the movement itself fails. One of the most pervasive misperceptions in the...