Ameer Afraid June 10, 2003
Tags: Nuclear , Terrorism , Wars , Military , China , Iran , Pakistan , America , Leaders
From Crusades to Qital: The Conflict of East And West
On October 22, 2001, I read an article by Ken Ringle in the Washington Post: “The Crusaders Giant foot: After a Millennium their Marks Remain.” The essay detailed the history of the Crusades, the 11th century Muslim civilization and the waves that ensued when the two worlds that had hitherto
only heard of each other came into confrontation in the Crusades. As I read, I could not describe my shock when I saw the parallels between the realities behind the so called religious wars of a thousand years ago and the realities behind this War of and on Terrorism which has come to be cloaked, voluntarily and rhetorically, in similar religious garb ever since Sept. 11.
Ringle tells us that it is said, in 1005, the Caliph of Egypt, in a fit of madness, ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem where Christians believed Jesus was entombed, and from then on, raiders and thugs in the area would freely set upon Christian pilgrims. In this context, Pope Urban II -- a relatively weak and obscure pope until that point -- in 1095 issued his famous call to recapture Jerusalem, the holy land, from the "infidels." He hoped, that by giving Europe a unified cause, the infighting and corruption within Europe could be halted and the torn seams of the Church could be sown once again (under his guidance and vision of course). He called their attention to the fact that Christians were being oppressed and dispossessed; and that Jerusalem was groaning under non-Christian yoke. The Holy Sepulcher, he warned, would be turned into a mosque. To further encourage the masses, he offered a Papal Indulgence, which offered the remission of all sins past, present and future. He alleged that Jesus would lead them because freeing the Holy Land would be tantamount to doing His work.
It was a war marked by pseudo-legitimate holy language, "Dieu li volt!" (God Wills it!); and it energized the demure landscape of Europe. Businessmen, knights, barons, peasants, picked up their lives and imposed their anger on the East. As Ken Ringle points out, this rage was "as much for adventure and plunder as for God." In all of Europe there were poor, backwards, illiterate and loosely organized hordes of thieves, villains and mercenaries who headed to Jerusalem, looting and plundering as they went along, "some making side trips through German cities to murder Jews as a sort of warm up" to the Muslims. Urban did not foresee that the poor masses, hopelessly looking for saviors, would get involved in the endeavor, and in their fervor and zealotry, would be torn up by trained Muslim armies who were at the height of their power.
At that time, Europe was sunk in violence, illiteracy and superstitious versions of its religions; while, at the same time, the Islamic civilization reached from Spain to China and flourished: Cordoba alone had 70 libraries; Persia had the world’s first Observatory; Baghdad was known for its scholarship and economic prowess; and the Muslim population was the most civilized and educated in the world. Any international trade or global issue that arose somehow found its way under the gaze of the large Muslim empires that sat in the middle of the globe. The crusaders came on horses and ships and carried out a wholesale slaughter of Muslims and Jews, such that a chronicler of the time, walking through the streets, stated that -- "heaps of heads and hands could be seen." The First Crusaders, legitimate or not, began about 300 years of war.
David Lamb writes, in his book "The Arab: Journeys Beyond the Mirage" about the Arabs after the first Crusade, that "they [Arabs] could not understand what they had done to offend the Christians, and they could not comprehend the behavior of the crude foreigners." The world’s great civilization, with all of its resources, could not figure out what had prompted the unleashing of European anger upon them.
Permit me the opportunity to paint a similar picture using similar words regarding a different time; regarding the present. It sounds strangely similar:
It is said that in 1991, in a fit of anger, the President of the United States, supported economic sanctions on Iraq, and placed his military in the lands of Muslims, which led to half a million children dying. In this context, Osama Bin Laden, with the support of Mullah Muhammad Omar -- a relatively weak and obscure religious leader[1] -- in 1998, issued the famous call to recapture Jerusalem and the Muslim holy lands, from the hands of the "infidels". He hoped, that by giving Islam a unified cause, the infighting and corruption within the Islamic regimes could be halted and the sectarian schisms ripping Islam could be healed (under his guidance and vision of course). The Muslim’s attention was turned to the fact that they were being oppressed and dispossessed across the world; and that Jerusalem was groaning under non-Muslim yoke. The Dome of the Rock, they were warned, would be turned into a temple. To further encourage the masses, he and his clergymen promised paradise – an automatic remission of all sins – to those who died for their cause. They alleged that fighting the Jews and Christians was tantamount to fighting wars as the Prophet Muhammad had fought.
It was a call marked by ambiguous, barely legitimate, holy language, "Fi sabillillah" (For God!); and it energized the demure landscape of the Muslim world. Businessmen, ex-army generals, media moguls, and the destitute picked up their lives and pressed their anger against the West; as much for plunder and venting-of-frustration as for God. In all of the Muslim world there were poor, backwards, illiterate and loosely organized hordes of thieves, gangs and drug dealers who joined the terrorists, looting and plundering indiscriminately in various parts of the world. Some of them blew up embassies in squalid African and Asian cities as a sort of warm up to the "infidels" of America. Osama did not realize that the poor masses hopelessly in search of a savior would get involved and in their fervor and zealotry be torn up by the trained American armies and well aimed bombs.
The Muslim world was sunk in violence, illiteracy and superstitious versions of its religion; while, at the time, the United States was in its Golden Age, known for its scholarship and economic prowess; and the American population was the most civilized and educated in the world: Washington DC had hundreds of libraries; in California, the world’s first atmospheric telescope was headquartered; and New York was known as a financial center and as the lap of learning. Any issues of global importance or finance somehow went through Western channels.
The Easterners came. Instead of ships and horses they came through email and airplane to carry out an atrocity upon the people of New York, so that chroniclers, walking in the streets after the event, saw heaps of hands and limbs buried in the rubble. This act, religiously legitimized, began a war that then Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said would last "for a long time."
But as the fighting took place, the Americans did not understand what they had done to deserve the unleashed Eastern anger."
The result: Everywhere fountains of blood.
Remarkable parallels of history or mere coincidence? Aside from the reversal of roles is it really even possible to tell one set of events apart from the other? I will leave it to the military historians to quibble on whether the military magnitude of the Christian sacking of Jerusalem in the 11th century is comparable to the infiltration attack on New York on September 11. Certainly, there are many ways in which the parallel does not stand. Most obviously, in the First Crusade, the Crusaders managed to conquer Jerusalem and pillage it in the traditional sense. Neither New York nor DC were conquered or “pillaged”. However, the point remains that just as Jerusalem was the spiritual center of the globe at that time. Whosoever could control Jerusalem gained a great psychological advantage. Similarly, whoever influences the functions, finances, and processes that take place in New York gives themselves a psychological advantages and spiritual high. In today’s materialistic world, wealth and finance are the measure of superiority, not religion; such being the case, it is not a stretch to say that New York serves the same function for today’s capitalistic world that Jerusalem served for yesterday’s religious world.
What I am certain of is that the relationship of the two parties back then is similar to the relationship of the two parties involved now. It is important to note that both the Crusades and the War on Terrorism had precipitating catalysts that are vague and ambiguous. What is the "real" reason is unknown to us. Theories purport to explain it: inherent clash of civilization, jealousy on the part of the dispossessed, inherent religious angst, and good versus evil. Others point to specific events: the order to destroy the Holy Sepulcher, the decision to place military bases and troops in the Middle East. Just about anything can be considered the motivation for the wars and anything a catalyst for the wars. Essentially, however, the Muslims back then just forgot the orders to sack the Holy Sepulcher, forgot that Christian pilgrims to Jerusalem deserved protection and not harassment, forgot that Europeans did not appreciate the continual encroachment of Muslims upon their lands, or the constant imposition of puppet regimes. Similarly, the Empire of Today, America, has forgotten the sanctions that have killed half a million Iraqi children (if not more), illegal Israeli settlements, forgotten the economic and social rape that occurs when puppet feudal aristocracies, from Saudi to Pakistan are funded and armed by America for the sake of continual American expansion. The Muslims of long ago were guilty of not being self-critical or understanding towards others. Is America going to repeat that error? All indicia point to "Yes."
I purposely paint a bleak picture. If what I have stated above is to be accepted, war is imminent, peace is over, death is looming. As the Crusaders came time and again at Jerusalem so various frustrated Easterners, those seeking glory, will come at America; some eyeing power, others will vent their frustration; all of them will seek to represent their people. Sadly, none of them really will and those same people will pay the price for the transgressions of a few each time America hits back. This is a cycle that does not end. Get out your hats of apathy. Fall into the snow of your indifference, slow your metabolism, and maybe, if you have enough fat to hibernate, you may miss a world in its winter.
Or, there is the alternative.
1 -- The Crusades created a new, more interconnected, level of civilization, which tremendously increased the number of Europeans who opened themselves up to knowledge in the Muslim world. The events of 9/11, similarly, especially with the presence of the Internet, must cause the average Easterner to look into the reservoirs of Western knowledge, and universities and take the lessons of their teachers back to their homes. It is said, that the father of Josef, a student of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) took books of philosophy back to Paris and was burnt as a heretic. Similarly, in today’s age, after the most recent tragedy, it must be Muslim scholars who must look more deeply into the books and ideas from Paris and New York even at the cost of being burnt as heretics. Thus, just as there emerged Roger Bacon – the founder of the first college in Europe – who studied in Muslim Spain sometime in the 13th century, so there must be more Roger Bacons serving the Muslim world who must emerge after the opening of the gateway today.
There is some evidence of the fact that this has already begun. The case of Aghajari and Khatami in Iran is one such example. An Islamic Scholar, Allama Javid Ghamidi from Pakistan pointed out that today’s Muslim must be as a hummingbird, sucking the nectar out of the flower of the West, while ignoring that which it considers poisons, to take back to its nest. This was, indeed the project the West began upon the first Crusade. The beneficiaries of this project was the entire West through the creation of men like Dante who willingly took and absorbed pieces of Islamic theology into his story. Now is the time that Muslims must become that hummingbird. Muslims must look into the methods that Europe employed in combating fanaticism, while making sure that it is staying true to its own Islamic roots. It is, indeed, quite a challenge. The burden of persuasion is on them.
2 -- The Muslims of that time, the more, shall we say, humanistic civilization by virtue of being better organized, produced a leader like Saladin. H solved the back and forth tugs of civilization; he was generous, kind, diplomatic (it is said that he ordered his horseman to carry ice down a mountain to comfort Richard the Lion-Hearted during his illness). So the West, today’s representative of humanism by virtue of its knowledge and organization, will need to produce a Saladin to eventually deal with the East. Saladin was a man who was known for his military prowess, no doubt; but even that prowess is derived from the fact that he found creative means to avoid the massive bloodshed partaken by his predecessors. He was recognized for his kindness, patience, and tolerance. Is the West capable of producing one such leader? The standard, Saladin, against which the entire Western world should be judging its future leaders is indeed quite high. We have not made the effort to elect such representative in recent history. The burden of production is on us.
Thus, perhaps the future is not as bleak as the initial historical parallel, or as the leaders from both sides would lead us to believe. In fact, the very nature of history and time has changed since a thousand years ago. Sometimes things that took centuries before can be compressed into years or decades today. Barring a massive nuclear immolation modern technology only aids in the cause of the transfer of knowledge. The tools – better transportation, more people, and positive elements of globalization – are all there. As for hope, that is a fountain bubbling with the sweat of righteous men.
Ringle tells us that it is said, in 1005, the Caliph of Egypt, in a fit of madness, ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem where Christians believed Jesus was entombed, and from then on, raiders and thugs in the area would freely set upon Christian pilgrims. In this context, Pope Urban II -- a relatively weak and obscure pope until that point -- in 1095 issued his famous call to recapture Jerusalem, the holy land, from the "infidels." He hoped, that by giving Europe a unified cause, the infighting and corruption within Europe could be halted and the torn seams of the Church could be sown once again (under his guidance and vision of course). He called their attention to the fact that Christians were being oppressed and dispossessed; and that Jerusalem was groaning under non-Christian yoke. The Holy Sepulcher, he warned, would be turned into a mosque. To further encourage the masses, he offered a Papal Indulgence, which offered the remission of all sins past, present and future. He alleged that Jesus would lead them because freeing the Holy Land would be tantamount to doing His work.
It was a war marked by pseudo-legitimate holy language, "Dieu li volt!" (God Wills it!); and it energized the demure landscape of Europe. Businessmen, knights, barons, peasants, picked up their lives and imposed their anger on the East. As Ken Ringle points out, this rage was "as much for adventure and plunder as for God." In all of Europe there were poor, backwards, illiterate and loosely organized hordes of thieves, villains and mercenaries who headed to Jerusalem, looting and plundering as they went along, "some making side trips through German cities to murder Jews as a sort of warm up" to the Muslims. Urban did not foresee that the poor masses, hopelessly looking for saviors, would get involved in the endeavor, and in their fervor and zealotry, would be torn up by trained Muslim armies who were at the height of their power.
At that time, Europe was sunk in violence, illiteracy and superstitious versions of its religions; while, at the same time, the Islamic civilization reached from Spain to China and flourished: Cordoba alone had 70 libraries; Persia had the world’s first Observatory; Baghdad was known for its scholarship and economic prowess; and the Muslim population was the most civilized and educated in the world. Any international trade or global issue that arose somehow found its way under the gaze of the large Muslim empires that sat in the middle of the globe. The crusaders came on horses and ships and carried out a wholesale slaughter of Muslims and Jews, such that a chronicler of the time, walking through the streets, stated that -- "heaps of heads and hands could be seen." The First Crusaders, legitimate or not, began about 300 years of war.
David Lamb writes, in his book "The Arab: Journeys Beyond the Mirage" about the Arabs after the first Crusade, that "they [Arabs] could not understand what they had done to offend the Christians, and they could not comprehend the behavior of the crude foreigners." The world’s great civilization, with all of its resources, could not figure out what had prompted the unleashing of European anger upon them.
Permit me the opportunity to paint a similar picture using similar words regarding a different time; regarding the present. It sounds strangely similar:
It is said that in 1991, in a fit of anger, the President of the United States, supported economic sanctions on Iraq, and placed his military in the lands of Muslims, which led to half a million children dying. In this context, Osama Bin Laden, with the support of Mullah Muhammad Omar -- a relatively weak and obscure religious leader[1] -- in 1998, issued the famous call to recapture Jerusalem and the Muslim holy lands, from the hands of the "infidels". He hoped, that by giving Islam a unified cause, the infighting and corruption within the Islamic regimes could be halted and the sectarian schisms ripping Islam could be healed (under his guidance and vision of course). The Muslim’s attention was turned to the fact that they were being oppressed and dispossessed across the world; and that Jerusalem was groaning under non-Muslim yoke. The Dome of the Rock, they were warned, would be turned into a temple. To further encourage the masses, he and his clergymen promised paradise – an automatic remission of all sins – to those who died for their cause. They alleged that fighting the Jews and Christians was tantamount to fighting wars as the Prophet Muhammad had fought.
It was a call marked by ambiguous, barely legitimate, holy language, "Fi sabillillah" (For God!); and it energized the demure landscape of the Muslim world. Businessmen, ex-army generals, media moguls, and the destitute picked up their lives and pressed their anger against the West; as much for plunder and venting-of-frustration as for God. In all of the Muslim world there were poor, backwards, illiterate and loosely organized hordes of thieves, gangs and drug dealers who joined the terrorists, looting and plundering indiscriminately in various parts of the world. Some of them blew up embassies in squalid African and Asian cities as a sort of warm up to the "infidels" of America. Osama did not realize that the poor masses hopelessly in search of a savior would get involved and in their fervor and zealotry be torn up by the trained American armies and well aimed bombs.
The Muslim world was sunk in violence, illiteracy and superstitious versions of its religion; while, at the time, the United States was in its Golden Age, known for its scholarship and economic prowess; and the American population was the most civilized and educated in the world: Washington DC had hundreds of libraries; in California, the world’s first atmospheric telescope was headquartered; and New York was known as a financial center and as the lap of learning. Any issues of global importance or finance somehow went through Western channels.
The Easterners came. Instead of ships and horses they came through email and airplane to carry out an atrocity upon the people of New York, so that chroniclers, walking in the streets after the event, saw heaps of hands and limbs buried in the rubble. This act, religiously legitimized, began a war that then Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said would last "for a long time."
But as the fighting took place, the Americans did not understand what they had done to deserve the unleashed Eastern anger."
The result: Everywhere fountains of blood.
Remarkable parallels of history or mere coincidence? Aside from the reversal of roles is it really even possible to tell one set of events apart from the other? I will leave it to the military historians to quibble on whether the military magnitude of the Christian sacking of Jerusalem in the 11th century is comparable to the infiltration attack on New York on September 11. Certainly, there are many ways in which the parallel does not stand. Most obviously, in the First Crusade, the Crusaders managed to conquer Jerusalem and pillage it in the traditional sense. Neither New York nor DC were conquered or “pillaged”. However, the point remains that just as Jerusalem was the spiritual center of the globe at that time. Whosoever could control Jerusalem gained a great psychological advantage. Similarly, whoever influences the functions, finances, and processes that take place in New York gives themselves a psychological advantages and spiritual high. In today’s materialistic world, wealth and finance are the measure of superiority, not religion; such being the case, it is not a stretch to say that New York serves the same function for today’s capitalistic world that Jerusalem served for yesterday’s religious world.
What I am certain of is that the relationship of the two parties back then is similar to the relationship of the two parties involved now. It is important to note that both the Crusades and the War on Terrorism had precipitating catalysts that are vague and ambiguous. What is the "real" reason is unknown to us. Theories purport to explain it: inherent clash of civilization, jealousy on the part of the dispossessed, inherent religious angst, and good versus evil. Others point to specific events: the order to destroy the Holy Sepulcher, the decision to place military bases and troops in the Middle East. Just about anything can be considered the motivation for the wars and anything a catalyst for the wars. Essentially, however, the Muslims back then just forgot the orders to sack the Holy Sepulcher, forgot that Christian pilgrims to Jerusalem deserved protection and not harassment, forgot that Europeans did not appreciate the continual encroachment of Muslims upon their lands, or the constant imposition of puppet regimes. Similarly, the Empire of Today, America, has forgotten the sanctions that have killed half a million Iraqi children (if not more), illegal Israeli settlements, forgotten the economic and social rape that occurs when puppet feudal aristocracies, from Saudi to Pakistan are funded and armed by America for the sake of continual American expansion. The Muslims of long ago were guilty of not being self-critical or understanding towards others. Is America going to repeat that error? All indicia point to "Yes."
I purposely paint a bleak picture. If what I have stated above is to be accepted, war is imminent, peace is over, death is looming. As the Crusaders came time and again at Jerusalem so various frustrated Easterners, those seeking glory, will come at America; some eyeing power, others will vent their frustration; all of them will seek to represent their people. Sadly, none of them really will and those same people will pay the price for the transgressions of a few each time America hits back. This is a cycle that does not end. Get out your hats of apathy. Fall into the snow of your indifference, slow your metabolism, and maybe, if you have enough fat to hibernate, you may miss a world in its winter.
Or, there is the alternative.
1 -- The Crusades created a new, more interconnected, level of civilization, which tremendously increased the number of Europeans who opened themselves up to knowledge in the Muslim world. The events of 9/11, similarly, especially with the presence of the Internet, must cause the average Easterner to look into the reservoirs of Western knowledge, and universities and take the lessons of their teachers back to their homes. It is said, that the father of Josef, a student of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) took books of philosophy back to Paris and was burnt as a heretic. Similarly, in today’s age, after the most recent tragedy, it must be Muslim scholars who must look more deeply into the books and ideas from Paris and New York even at the cost of being burnt as heretics. Thus, just as there emerged Roger Bacon – the founder of the first college in Europe – who studied in Muslim Spain sometime in the 13th century, so there must be more Roger Bacons serving the Muslim world who must emerge after the opening of the gateway today.
There is some evidence of the fact that this has already begun. The case of Aghajari and Khatami in Iran is one such example. An Islamic Scholar, Allama Javid Ghamidi from Pakistan pointed out that today’s Muslim must be as a hummingbird, sucking the nectar out of the flower of the West, while ignoring that which it considers poisons, to take back to its nest. This was, indeed the project the West began upon the first Crusade. The beneficiaries of this project was the entire West through the creation of men like Dante who willingly took and absorbed pieces of Islamic theology into his story. Now is the time that Muslims must become that hummingbird. Muslims must look into the methods that Europe employed in combating fanaticism, while making sure that it is staying true to its own Islamic roots. It is, indeed, quite a challenge. The burden of persuasion is on them.
2 -- The Muslims of that time, the more, shall we say, humanistic civilization by virtue of being better organized, produced a leader like Saladin. H solved the back and forth tugs of civilization; he was generous, kind, diplomatic (it is said that he ordered his horseman to carry ice down a mountain to comfort Richard the Lion-Hearted during his illness). So the West, today’s representative of humanism by virtue of its knowledge and organization, will need to produce a Saladin to eventually deal with the East. Saladin was a man who was known for his military prowess, no doubt; but even that prowess is derived from the fact that he found creative means to avoid the massive bloodshed partaken by his predecessors. He was recognized for his kindness, patience, and tolerance. Is the West capable of producing one such leader? The standard, Saladin, against which the entire Western world should be judging its future leaders is indeed quite high. We have not made the effort to elect such representative in recent history. The burden of production is on us.
Thus, perhaps the future is not as bleak as the initial historical parallel, or as the leaders from both sides would lead us to believe. In fact, the very nature of history and time has changed since a thousand years ago. Sometimes things that took centuries before can be compressed into years or decades today. Barring a massive nuclear immolation modern technology only aids in the cause of the transfer of knowledge. The tools – better transportation, more people, and positive elements of globalization – are all there. As for hope, that is a fountain bubbling with the sweat of righteous men.
Times viewed:11581
interact
read comments 85
Similar Articles
- Pakistan's Nuclear Test - Ten Years Later Pervez Hoodbhoy
- India-US Nuclear Deal Udayakumar
- Warday Ali Rizvi
- Pakistan After The Assassination: Interview with Pervez Hoodbhoy Chowk
- Whither Pakistan? The Presidential 'Election' and Beyond Asif Naqshbandi
US Elections 2008 Primaries
THEMES
Latest Interacts
- mohar11: Re: # 182 Kaal I... Dhokha and Being a
- Eklavya: Kashmir was fine until... Dhokha and Being a
- mohar11: GT/Kaal Kashmir was fine until... Dhokha and Being a
- Eklavya: Mohar, if you are... Dhokha and Being a
- mohar11: Re: # 174 GT FV... Dhokha and Being a
- GT: kaal bhai: ".... once Muslims... Dhokha and Being a
- mohar11: Re: # 172 kaal [...that... Dhokha and Being a
- GT: Kaal bhai: Aaj sach me... Dhokha and Being a








