THE MUSLIM ECONOMIC TRAP

The Correlation of Government Economic Power and Present Day Terrorism

By Carol M. Fuller

After the attacks of 9/11 on New York and Washington scholars and journalists told us the causes lie in the high unemployment rates and weak economies in many Muslim countries.  Economic stresses drive some young men, those who are especially susceptible to religious fervor, to embrace terror.  On the other hand, we are told the cause of terrorism is an unfathomable black hatred of everything Western boiling up among religious fundamentalists, who are striving for a role in the councils of their governments but have been squelched by autocratic regimes.  I concluded that the road to some degree of understanding of the suicidal violence of al-Qaeda and of a small number of other groups was through the economic history and current economic situation of the Middle East.  I was unable, however, to find books that concentrate on economic history and economic conditions in Islam and had to be satisfied with my own compilation of details ferreted out from a wide variety of historical studies and the current media.  The result is the first one-fourth of the book ---

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: THE ECONOMIC INFLUENCES ON ISLAM

This section finds illustrations of the above from the life of Muhammad, the military conquest, the great early dynasties, the conversion of vanquished peoples, on to the Ottoman Empire, its decline and end, and to the formation of present day Middle East and North Africa.

I believe Muslims should not be offended by an economic emphasis on their history.  Islam encompasses all aspects of life, including economic matters, government, law, education, community relations, the family, marriage, daily life, and more.  Islam is a “holistic” faith of customs and practices that involve the full range of human activities.  Economic matters affect basic survival, but also operate psychologically to affect human pride, ambition, satisfaction, frustration or despair.

PART ONE: CUSTOMS AND BELIEFS BRING RICHES TO THE WEST AND STIFLE PROSPERITY IN ISLAM.

In comparing the Muslim world, its history and its present with the world I know, Europe and America, I was struck by the difference in ownership of productive property, particularly land.  (Until modern times the dominant economy everywhere was agrarian, and nearly all production was from the land.)  In Europe private property was the lever of economic strength used by individuals to wrest liberties from the king, something many of us learned in school.  The history of private property in the West, the rule of law and the winning of liberty is given here in considerable detail.

In contrast, private ownership of productive property has never been vigorous in Muslims lands . . . . Such ownership has been handicapped in Muslim lands by the requirements of their religion and by customs inherited from oriental civilizations. . . . Beliefs and customs promote a steady flow of ownership of productive property to the government and a generous but lesser flow to religious clerics—but always away from ordinary people.  Other factors counter-productive to prosperity are Islamic education, discouragement of the creativity of women, rapid population growth, and intolerance.

PART TWO:  AN ECONOMIC PROFILE FOR TERRORISM?

When I looked at economic evaluations of certain present-day Muslim countries, I could see a correlation between incidents of terror and overwhelming economic power resting in the hands of governments.  The governments that have sponsored or assisted terrorism have ownership or control of high percentages of the countries’ productive property.  With little or no dependence on taxation they need not listen to the voices of their citizens. . . .

In finding property ownership to be a key to the turbulence of the Middle East I am not attempting to excuse interference by Western nations, a bitter complaint of Muslims.  The twentieth century struggle against Communism resulted in Western offences against the Islamic people and elsewhere.  Around the world a great many nationalist movements had communistic elements, and America in particular felt it had to actively counter them . . . .

The governments of Syria, Iran, Algeria, Yemen, and Libya—countries apparently involved in terrorism—obtain a large amount of revenue from owning productive property.  In the case of Syria, that ownership is not outright, but government control of productive property is overwhelming. . . These governments also have poor Index ratings in Government Intervention, Regulation, Banking and Finance, Property Rights, and Informal Market.  Unemployment is very high.  Saudi Arabia rates very poorly in government intervention in the economy and has middling ratings in three of the four areas that relate to private property, hence its “profile” is only borderline.  Yet Saudi religious foundations and perhaps the Saudi government are well known as sources of terrorist financing.

This theory falls down in regard to the small Gulf States.  They have a huge proportion of government revenue coming from government-owned property, yet they are not involved in terrorism.  The answer lies in their history of commerce.  Located on ancient sea routes, these small countries of the Persian Gulf have long been influenced by their merchant communities.  They have had close contact with Great Britain and are influenced by common law.  Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, and the UAE give good to moderate protection to private property and are rated by the Index of Economic Freedom, 2005, as Mostly Free.  Qatar, on the other hand, is “Mostly Unfree,” and has occasionally been accused of terrorist contacts, but it has not been deeply involved in terrorist activities.

PART THREE:  MILITARY SLAVERY AND MODERN TERRORISM

The military divisions were made up of young men from the frontiers.  They had been captured as boys, converted to Islam, and were rigorously educated or trained for five years or longer. . . . This system was entirely unique to Islam, although slaves serving as soldiers had occurred in various parts of the world....

Of comparable uniqueness to the Islamic world is the recent outbreak of terrorism connected with extreme Islamic fundamentalism . . . . Is it possible that a common thread runs through these two unusual developments?

REINTERPRETING ISLAM IN THE LIGHT OF MODERN KNOWLEDGE

Among many who urge reform in Islam or who organize and channel reform movements is Muhammad Rasjidi, Ambassador to Pakistan in the mid-twentieth century from the Republic of Indonesia.  He writes:

“While it might be true that those who lived in the time of the Prophet could understand religion better than the people of today who must study Islam by means of documents only, we cannot ignore the considerable change in social situation and world conditions in the past fourteen centuries.  The insistence on imitating the predecessors reflects a loss of self-confidence which was at one time widespread in Islamic communities.  The texts of the Qur’an are still and always will be valid, but we should understand them in the light of present knowledge.  One of the great tasks facing religious scholars in our time is the re-examination of the jurisprudence of Islam in the light of reason and modern knowledge.  Since Islam does not make a distinction between the secular and the religious, and since a large part of the Muslim world has but recently attained political independence and is now playing a significant role in world affairs, this re-examination of Islamic law is all the more urgently needed.”