This is the 21st century and yet, somehow, we still need to remind ourselves that genocide is wrong, that it is not an acceptable tool to achieve a certain geopolitical end, real or perceived, and that no country or government is entitled to engage in it without consequences and while shielding itself using terms like “domestic affairs” and “national sovereignty.” It’s disgusting that we still need to debate whether intervention meant to prevent or stop genocide is “wise.”
Pointing to the historical nationalist upheavals that the Ottoman Empire witnessed in its last decades does not negate the occurrence of a genocide targeting Armenians.
Have Muslim organizations in the U.S. issued any guidelines to Mosques and Islamic centers on how to deal with troubled youths and extremist elements who are trying to recruit in their midst? Have they created outreach programs to Muslim families dealing with radicalized youths in an attempt to help them come back to the mainstream? Have they set up special camps that can help in these matters? Are they providing specialized training to Imams on how to deal with these and other related issues? Have they created educational guidelines on how certain issues related to Islamic teachings, such as Jihad and Dhimmitude, among others, should be breached?
Continue reading “Muslim Responsibility in Countering Violent Extremism”
If noting the geopolitical nature of the motives involved behind a country’s external adventurism is to be treated as sufficient factor for legitimizing that country’s behavior, then, no country can be ever be faulted or condemned for its adventurism, be it an Iran, a Russia, a China, a France or a United States. As such, those who insist on justifying Iran, Russia or China’s adventurism while condemning France’s or America’s reveal their ideological slant and hypocrisy. If one is truly opposed to intervention in the “internal” affairs of other states one has to do it across the board, and not play favorites.
The Ammar Abdulhamid Archive 