- Payroll tax deal close: Why did Republicans back down?
- Israel says Bangkok, Delhi, and Tbilisi attacks all linked – to Iran
- Rick Santorum's new machine-gun ad: Will it work? (+video)
- As Sarkozy seeks new term, French are wary of 'Merkozy' (+video)
- Honduras prison fire kills more than 300, highlights regional problem (+video)
'Why do they hate us?'
(Page 9 of 9)
"When Bush says 'crusade', or that he wants bin Laden 'dead or alive', that is a fatwa (religious edict) without any judicial review", he cautions. "It denies all the principles that America is supposed to be."
A fatwa is something Amirul Haq, a Pakistani shopkeeper whose son died two years ago in a jihad in Kashmir, understands better than judicial review. "When I heard that my son died, I was satisfied," he says.
It's a sentiment shared by Azad Khan, too. On a hot Sunday afternoon in Mardan, Pakistan, Mr. Khan and his family have laid out a feast in a small guesthouse next to the local mosque. They are celebrating because they have just heard that Mr. Khan's 20-year-old son, Saeed, has been killed in a gun battle with Indian troops in the part of Jammu and Kashmir state that is under Indian control. With his death, Saeed has become another shahid, a martyr and heroic defender of the Muslims against the enemies of Islam. According to the Koran, shahideen are not actually dead; they are still alive, they just can't be seen. And through acts of bravery, a shahid guarantees that his whole family will go to heaven.
"It is not a thing to be mourned. We are happy," says Khan, sitting down to a meal of chicken and mutton, rice and bread, along with leaders of the group with which Saeed had fought. "I told him to take part in jihad [holy war] because he is the son of a Muslim," Khan says. "And just as we fight in Kashmir, if we need to fight against the United States in Afghanistan we are ready, because we are Muslims. It is our duty to fight against any infidels who are threatening our Muslim brothers."
It's not likely that many Pakistanis, or other Muslims, will actually go to Afghanistan to fight the Americans - assuming American soldiers land there. Khan's militant views are not shared by most of his countrymen.
But in a broader sense, and in the longer term, many people in the Middle East fear that the coming war against terrorism - unless it is waged with the utmost caution - could unleash new waves of anti-American sentiment.
Jamal al-Adimi, a US-educated Yemeni lawyer, speaks for many when he warns that "if violence escalates, you bring seeds and water for terrorism. You kill someone's brother or mother, and you will just get more crazy people."
Trying to root out terrorism without re-plowing the soil in which it grows - which means rethinking the policies that breed anti-American sentiment - is unlikely to succeed, say ordinary Middle Easterners and some of their leaders.
On the practical level, Hariri points out, "launching a war is in the hands of the Americans, but winning it needs everybody. And that means everybody should see that he has an interest in joining the coalition" that Washington is building.
On a higher level, argues Bassam Tibi, a professor of international relations at Gottingen University in Germany, and an expert on political Islam, "we need value consensus between the West and Islam on democracy and human rights to combat Islamic fundamentalism. We can't do it with bombs and shooting - that will only exacerbate the problem."
Reported by staff writers Scott Baldauf in Islamabad, Pakistan; Cameron W. Barr in Amman, Jordan; Peter Ford in London; Nicole Gaouette in Jerusalem; Robert Marquand in Beijing; Scott Peterson in Sana, Yemen; Ilene R. Prusher in Tokyo; as well as contributors Nicholas Blanford in Beirut, Lebanon; Sarah Gauch in Cairo; and Simon Montlake in Jakarta, Indonesia.




