This week’s argument risks failing the test of what’s appropriate given the awful violence the Israeli armed forces are raining on Gaza right now. The point, however, needs to be made sooner rather than later. It also draws on, and moves a step forward from, what we wrote in a National Interest piece in October 2020.
Let’s make the principled point on Gaza first, as what’s playing out there isn’t open to much debate. It is a brutal retaliation, collective punishment and mass revenge being delivered by an angry sovereign power with the strongest military in the entire Middle East and beyond.
What Hamas carried out on 7 October was a hate crime against Israelis and Jews at a mass level. But Israel’s revenge and punishment against the malevolent and terrorist Hamas, in its magnitude and indiscriminate nature, is already looking like a retaliatory, mass hate crime against Gaza Palestinians and on a broader plane, Muslims. It has become counterproductive already, embarrassing Israel’s friends and uniting its critics.
America apart, almost all of Israel’s significant friends have spoken up, expressing more or less similar views. They’ve also abstained from voting on the UN General Assembly resolution asking for a ceasefire. Those who abstained include India, among Israel and Netanyahu’s closest friends now. It won’t bother Netanyahu’s Israel.
The question we need to ask is, could Israel have been just as nonchalant if it had faced a united challenge on this from the Islamic world? If the Muslim world were a real, political, pan-national entity, it would add up to nearly 2 billion people, or one-fourth of the world’s population today. In comparison, Jews account for up to 16 million, or 0.2 percent.
Are the Muslims largely poor and the Jews rich, and thereby, is a mismatch in their relative power to be expected?
Muslims are about 25 percent of the global population and also account for nearly 23 percent of the world’s GDP. That isn’t insignificant power. What do the Jews account for? Jewish people are spread across the world. And while they lead many financial institutions, they do not see themselves as one nation or one power. Nor do they secretly own the world as conspiracy theories say.
They identify with Israeli Jews, but even today in major urban centres and campuses across the western world — where much of the global wealth resides or is transacted — significant numbers of Jews have come out in protest against the severity of Israel’s response. We haven’t seen any such response from Muslim groups.
Even among the governments of Muslim-majority nations, those who have uttered words of condemnation can be counted on the fingers of one hand: Egypt, in one Sisi statement that was widely quoted in western media and not denied, the UAE, and probably one or two more.
Think about it. A force representing one-fourth of the world’s population, the same proportion of its economy, holding a bulk of the global energy reserves, much military power including nuclear weapons (Pakistan) and 150 times the Jewish population, has failed to deter Israel. If anything, Israel is able to toss this off — and I use that expression carefully — with contempt.
What, then, is the power of the Islamic world? Or what is commonly described as the Ummah, the dictionary meaning of which is “the whole community of Muslims bound together by ties of religion”. Translated, it means that all the Muslims of the world are united in a pan-national entity by their faith. Which brings us to some further questions. Is there such a thing as the Islamic world? Does a faith, any faith, transcend national boundaries or nationalist sentiment?
By reigniting the Middle East just when we had begun to believe it had gone into deep sleep and peace and reconciliation had broken out after the Abraham Accords, Hamas has also underlined the many contradictions within, and questions about, the Islamic world.
Islam is unique in that no other major faith sees itself as a pan-national entity in the loyalty, motivation and commitment of its adherents. There is no Christian equivalent or dream of an Ummah equivalent. The third most numerous faith, the Hindus, might have arguments among themselves but only over whether their country, India, is a Hindu Rashtra or not. The Jews have one country of their own.
The deepest contradiction within political Islam (as distinct from the faith and its practice and customs), comes from the belief that religious loyalties should take precedence over nationalism. The result is the Ummah fantasy.
Also Read: Israel is angry, Netanyahu poised for Gaza invasion. But there are limitations to military power
The world’s Muslims have set up multiple identity-based pan-national organisations. The most prominent is the OIC, or Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, with its 57 members and five observer states. These represent 23 percent of the global GDP. Their achievements as a collective, for any common Islamic cause, are zilch.
There’s been the Arab League and some other regional organisations in Africa and Asia, but none has counted for much on anything seen as a pan-Islamic issue. An Erdoğan or a Mahathir, or the Iranians, are taken more seriously.
The only pan-national organisation of Muslim nations making an impact is the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and it is the most West-friendly of these clubs of Islamic nations: Two of its key members joined the Abraham Accords and the third was on the verge of doing so when Hamas struck. Its adversary, if anything, is a fellow Islamic nation in Iran.
Qatar, though a member of the GCC, sits on the periphery geographically and politically, managing its deep ties with Iran, the US, and the most anti-western non-state actors — the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Qatar, let’s simply say, plays being Qatar.
If we step back and look at the so-called Islamic world’s history with conflict, we will find that almost all of it in the past 50 years has been within itself. We take 1973 as the cut-off because that was the last time some Muslim countries joined hands to fight a common non-Muslim enemy: Egypt and Syria against Israel in the Yom Kippur War. It could be argued, however, that both, led by Ba’athist, pro-Soviet, supposedly socialist dictators, were still not exactly Islamic powers.
Oil-producing Muslim countries did come together with this war to cartelise and raise the price of oil. Never mind that it ended up benefiting them more commercially than causing much strategic damage to Israel or its American ally.
Look, on the other hand, at the armed conflicts within this “world”. The thousands of Muslim civilians killed in Gaza, including women and children, are thousands too many. Contrast this with the war between the US-backed Saudi forces and Yemen’s Houthis. The UK-based Campaign Against Arms Trade (caat.org.uk) lists more than 3.77 lakh killed in this conflict, at least 1.5 lakh of them as a direct result of the fighting.
In the never-ending civil war in Sudan, nearly three lakh have been killed in the past decade, in addition to another two lakh or so who were documented to have been killed earlier in its Darfur province. Nearly four lakh Muslims have been killed in the civil war in Syria.
Almost all the million-plus Muslims killed across the Muslim world in the past decade have been killed by fellow Muslims, barring about 5,000 to 7,000 each (if that many) by the Americans and the Russians (acting for the Assad regime in Syria).
We know the history of the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, Af-Pak, the Mujahideen to Taliban to back. And while it is fashionable to blame the West for all the crises in the Muslim “world,” it was Saddam Hussein’s Iraq that peremptorily occupied Kuwait, and it was Islamic powers that pleaded with the Americans to come and liberate it. Among the press corps covering that war, there was a cruel joke: What should be the anthem of the Saudi and allied Muslim nations’ armies (including elements from Pakistan)? ‘Onward Christian soldiers’.
One key reason a powerful community of 200 crore punches so far below its weight is that it is beset with so many conflicts and contradictions. The most self-destructive is its failure to accept that nationalism, and often even ideology, are much stronger sentiments than the cross-border loyalties of a shared religion. This fantasy of faith-based unity has once again been laid bare by the Muslim world’s failure to influence Israel’s conduct of its Gaza war. Netanyahu, or any Israeli leader of the day, always works on this safe presumption.
Also Read: In this war of dead baby pictures, yours versus mine, the question of who’s the victim will be lost