There Is No Such Thing As A Holy War

The steadfast immorality of fanaticism

September 14th, 2001. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, several Islamic leaders, including Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder of Hamas, released statements setting the record straight about their religion:

The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States […] We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents.

Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, the Head of the Directorate of Religious Affairs in Turkey, continued:

Islam prohibits terrorism as well as suicide. Jihad is neither, and has no place for taking innocent lives or one’s own life. No cause, howsoever noble or just, can justify terrorism […] no thinking Muslim can go along with the use of terrorism for securing political goals.

Abdulaziz bin Abdullah Al-Sheikh, the chief mufti of Saudi Arabia, added:

You must know Islam’s firm position against all these terrible crimes. The world must know that Islam is a religion of peace and mercy and goodness; it is a religion of justice and guidance […] Islam has forbidden violence in all its forms.

You’re not supposed to think too deeply about the disconnect between these words and the attacks that Hamas committed in Israel. Just as you’re not supposed to look too closely at the campaign of oppression that Israel is waging against the Palestinians.

You’re not supposed to ask why the soldiers who dragged women and children from their homes are unaware that no thinking Muslim can go along with the use of terrorism to secure political goals.

Or why the gunmen who massacred defenceless festival-goers didn’t know that the Noble Laws of Islam forbid all forms of attacks on innocents.

And you’re certainly not supposed to ask why the jihadists who spat on the mangled body of Shani Nicole Louk as they paraded her through the streets, forgot that Islam is a religion of peace and mercy and goodness.

No, the rules for discussing the Israel/Palestine conflict are simple.

You’re supposed to pick a side and defend its actions no matter what. You’re supposed to downplay — and occasionally celebrate — the atrocities they commit. And you’re supposed to indulge in “whataboutism” whenever somebody points out how indefensible those atrocities are.

For example, you can say that Israel has a right to defend itself, but you mustn’t point out that the indiscriminate bombing of women and children has nothing to do with self-defence.

You can frame the attacks by Hamas as a righteous uprising against occupation, but you should gloss over questions about how slaughtering innocent civilians (and provoking a backlash that will inevitably kill thousands of Palestinians) furthers the Palestinian cause.

Most of all, you can pretend that the only way to achieve peace is for one side to be subjugated or eradicated, but you must never admit that peace would have been achieved long ago if not for the stubbornness and intractable stupidity that is the hallmark of religious fanaticism.

There’s a reason why, however sincerely they believe in their Gods, almost every nation on Earth draws a sharp line between religious dogma and political affairs.

And that’s because Gods are notoriously reluctant to come to Earth and settle the disputes being fought in their name. And while they usually slip in some guidelines about murder being bad in between demands for worship and praise, it’s amazing how often their most devoted followers don’t get the message.

Slavery, segregation, the criminalisation of homosexuality, the burning of “witches”, it’s hard to think of an atrocity in the past 500 years that wasn’t passionately defended by somebody with a Bible or a Quran or some other holy book in their hands.

And we’ve (mostly) outgrown these horrors because we stopped allowing fairy tales and Puritanism to dictate societal affairs.

This isn’t a simple border dispute. It’s not a matter of immmigration policy. It can’t be settled with free trade agreements and economic treaties. It’s an argument about whether God, the almighty creator of the universe, has given this land to the Muslims or the Jews.

If neither side will accept a more reality-based foundation for diplomacy, what choice do they have but to fight?

It’s often said that the Israel/Palestine conflict is complicated. And clearly, it is. You can’t spend generations quarrelling over a piece of land without accumulating some socio-political scar tissue.

But it’s also clear that this conflict would be far less complicated if leaders on both sides would stop using 2500-year-old myths as justification for present-day brutality.

Because there’s no such thing as a “holy war”, just war waged by people who value ancient texts more than human life.

There’s no such thing as a “promised land”, just land stained with the blood of rabid, unshakeable fanatics (or, more often, the blood of their victims).

There’s no such thing as a “chosen people”, just people who would rather condemn their children to endless, senseless violence than break the cycle.

So maybe, after fifty-seven years of fear and death, it’s time to remind the terrorists in Palestine that “no cause, howsoever noble or just, can justify terrorism.”

Maybe it’s time that the billions of dollars in military support that Israel receives each year are made conditional on their refusal to “go along with the use of terrorism for securing political goals.”

Maybe it’s time for the people who claim to believe in religions of “peace and mercy and goodness” find it in their hearts to live up to those standards.

At least, until God finds a moment to set the record straight.

Read more at The Commentary. A collection of conversations and exclusive articles about race, politics and culture. Sign up here.