Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 12 – Following the
publication last month of “A Map of Ethno-Religious Threats” by the Moscow
Institute of National Strategy, there has been much speculation that Astrakhan
represents a bridge between the Islamicized North Caucasus and the
traditionally more moderate Islamic peoples of the Middle Volga.
But Astrakhan historian Andrey
Syzranov argues in the course of an interview to a media outlet there that this
image is far too simple and that the situation of the Muslim community in his
city is far more complicated, a reflection of the enormous natural diversity
among Muslims in all times and places (punkt-a.info/view_page/view/19071).
Radical Islamists from the North
Caucasus have made inroads in Astrakhan, Syzranov acknowledges, most infamously
by arranging telephone marriages between local Muslim men and radicalized
Muslim women from the North Caucasus, something entirely illegitimate in Islam
and recently exposed in the course of an FSB raid.
Moreover, there have been Salafi
groups in Astrakhan since the 1990s, some of whom have conducted intense
missionary activity. But these are not all of a piece, Syzranov says. There are
radicals, of course, but there are also moderate Salafis who want nothing to do
with the extremist element.
The historian notes that many of the
Muslim women who attend his university classes now wear the hijab, but that
does not disturb him because “it is more important what is inside their heads
than on them” and universities should be “much freer structures than schools”
where introducing a dress requirement is entirely possible.
Many
people now talk about “traditional” Islam, he continues, but when they do so,
they usually put it within quotation marks.
That is entirely appropriate. On the one hand, every country and every
people has its own “traditional” form of Islam just as it has its “traditional”
form of any other religion.
And
on the other, Russian officials often talk about “traditional” Islam to refer
to “the more moderate and tolerant Islam of muftis and spiritual administrations
which cooperate with the authorities.”
There is nothing inherently wrong with such cooperation: it occurs in
many countries. But some although far from all Salafis see it as a big “minus.”
As
one would expect, Syzranov says, “there are various kinds of people among the
Salafis.” There are “bandits,” there are
those who “are disappointed in their lives, and there are those who genuinely
accept that brand of the faith. There are reasons for each group to have turned
to that trend in Islam, and these must not be conflated.
The
Salafi element in the North Caucasus, he argues, reflects that region’s
specific experiences over the last two decades. “An entire generation of young
people has grown up under the conditions of the Caucasus war. They do not know
how to write, but they know how to shoot a Kalashnikov.” Muslims with different
experiences are will remain different.
Salafism
and especially its radical interpretation remains attractive to many because it
like other sectarian creeds presents the world in simple black and white terms
and allows those who accept it as special.
According to its “clear picture of the world, Allah is great, we are the
best, and all the rest are fools and enemies.”
Those
who know more about Islam – and they can learn about it from the Koran, from the
hadith, and from theologians – recognize that the world is more complicated
than that. “Salafi writings and websites
are only a drop in the bucket of Muslim theology which has been formed over the
course of centuries.”
“Islam,”
Syzranov concludes, remains “a religious of peace and kindness” and “this isn’t
changed by the Islamists!” Their actions
“only bring harm to Islam by discrediting it with terrorist actions, murders
and other types of force. This is incompatible with Islam,” as they fail to
understand but other Muslims recognize.
No comments:
Post a Comment