Guest Post: Speak the Languages, Know the Modes of Thought
Charles Cameron, who has appeared here before, is the former Senior Analyst with The Arlington Institute and Principal Researcher with the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University. He specializes in forensic theology, with a deep interest in millennial, eschatological and apocalyptic religious sects of all stripes.
Charles will be doing a new series of posts here at Zenpundit that will drill down into the important but often elusive religious-cultural connections that impact American national security and foreign policy issues.
Very pleased to have him aboard:
SPEAK THE LANGUAGES, KNOW THE MODES OF THOUGHT:
by Charles Cameron
SSgt. David Flaherty, currently deployed as the Zabul Provincial Reconstruction Team’s public information officer, is to be congratulated on speaking Pashto. But Wired‘s Danger Room comment, “The fact that this is considered newsworthy and exceptional — a U.S. military officer speaks one of the official languages of Afghanistan! — doesn’t reflect well on the national commitment to Afghanistan” is also to the point.
A couple of other recent items in the news about languages and translation at home and abroad should concern us.A report from the US Department of Justice on the FBI’s Translation Project was less than enthusiastic, not only finding that significant quantities of material collected in the Bureau’s highest-priority counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence collection categories were never evaluated, but that the number of translators inn the FBI pool had diminished since a 2005 audit, that in 2008 the FBI met its hiring goals for linguists in only 2 of its 14 critical languages, that security clearance and language proficiency training for a new linguist took 19 months before hiring could take place, and that 70 percent of the FBI’s own linguists in the field offices tested did not attend the FBIs required training course.
And retired and renowned Marine colonel Thomas X. Hammes was quoted in a recent piece on CBC News about allegations of “botched” translations in the Afghan theater leading NATO troops to faulty conclusions as saying, “We’re willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure ice cream and steak is there, and I would trade all of that for my entire tour if I could have one decent translator. Many times I’d trade body armor for a translator.”I want to suggest, though, that there is another aspect to this business. I was reminded of it when reading the FBI complaint against Luqman Ameen Abdullah and others connected with the recent events in Detroit. The complaint includes the phrase, “Abdullah also said that thegovernment plots and plans against them so they need to plot and plan in return”. The complaint doesn’t mention it, but that’s an echo of the words of the Qur’an, 8.30:
“And when those who disbelieve plot against thee (O Muhammad) to wound thee fatally, or to kill thee or to drive thee forth; they plot, but Allah (also) plotteth; and Allah is the best of plotters.”
What this suggests to me is that we need to be able to speak / read not only spoken or written languages of our sources, suspects, informants and opponents — but also the language or underlying logic of their thought. A close reading of the Detroit complaint’s text in association with that of the Qur’an gives us an understanding that Abdullah views his plotting as aligned with Allah’s. This in itself may not seems surprising, but it suggests a manner of reading that may prove fruitful in other occasions, and that’s the point I want to make.
Whatever the merits of the particular case of Luqman Abdullah — and I note that some respected analysts have their questions about that — it will be found to hold true in general that jihadist thought moves along Qur’anic pathways as surely as jihadist behavior parallels the behavior of Mohammed. A keen awareness of both will thus allow us to understand where the touching of familiar chords is most apt to stir the hearts of fellow believers, and hence strengthen the bonds of community and dedication between them.
When bin Laden retreated to the caves of Tora Bora, he was following in his Prophet’s footsteps, as Lawrence Wright masterfully showed in *The Looming Tower*. His spoken words often follow Qur’anic precedent in much the same way.Bin Laden’s address to the US just before the 2004 elections was a case in point for me. I read three translations (CNN, MEMRI, Al-Jazeera), none of which included the Qur’anic citation that headed the whole thing, and figured out what it must be from the repeated echoes in the text, notably “and just as you lay waste to our Nation, so shall we lay waste to yours”.
That put me very strongly in mind of Qur’an 2.194:
“For the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.”
Okay, I could figure out that bin Laden had this passage in mind as I read the transcripts of his address — but it wasn’t until I saw ABC’s transcript that I could confirm that Bin laden did indeed reference that verse directly.
Which powerfully reinforces the idea that bin Laden views his jihad against the US in terms of measured reciprocity — a notion which should give us pause every time we take an action which we would not choose to have taken against us…
And how good are we at this kind of “reading in parallel” — both abroadand at home?
To return to the Detroit affair, as UCLA’s Jean Rosenfeld pointed out, the NYT report on the event contained the phrase “a faction of a group called the Ummah, meaning the Brotherhood” — a completely misleading
translation which might suggest ties with the Egyptian “Muslim Brotherhood” — when the plain meaning of “Ummah” is the transnational community of Muslims. The New York Times is our newspaper of record.
The Times, in turn, was likely paraphrasing the FBI’s own press release, which speaks of “part of a group which calls themselves Ummah (‘the brotherhood’)”. It’s notable, though, that there is no mention of the
“brotherhood” in the entire 45 pages of the actual FBI complaint, written by those more closely involved with the investigation.
What the complaint itself does say is that the name “Ummah” was used as a cover for the movement’s real name, the “Dar-ul-Islam Movement“.
Okay, that’s a beginning…
And still our transcriptions of jihadist messages all too often omit religious content. Indeed, when the Joint Forces Command asked Jim Lacey to edit abu Musab al-Suri’s massive Call to Global Islamic Resistance for publication in English translation, he (rightly) produced a condensed version, but (wrongly, IMO) “also removed most of the repetitive theological justifications undergirding” al-Suri’s project.
[ Zen ed. Note: copy released to general public as A Terrorist’s Call to Global Jihad: Deciphering Abu Musab al-Suri’s Islamic Jihad Manifesto by Jim Lacey]
Lacey’s work is still a significant contribution, as I intend to detail in an upcoming review. But the omission of almost all trace of al-Suri’s significant messianic-Mahdist content, as you’d expect, leaves me wincing.
We need to be able to “read” jihad — this really shouldn’t need saying, eight years after 9/11, ten after Nairobi and Dar — against its Islamic background.
Always.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
I didn’t want to overburden an already long post with even more, but here’s another related example of our just not recognizing religious language when it’s present. It’s not gov’t in this case that’s missing religious signals, it’s the press — and it’s in another theater — this time, it’s the narco-evangelicals of La Familia in Michoacan. . Time magazine wrote of them: . Federal agents seized one copy of La Familia’s Bible in a raid last year. Quoted in local newspapers, the scripture paints an ideology that mixes Evangelical-style self-help with insurgent peasant slogans reminiscent of the Mexican Revolution. "I ask God for strength and he gives me challenges that make me strong; I ask him for wisdom and he gives me problems to resolve; I ask him for prosperity and he gives me brain and muscles to work," Moreno writes, using terms that could be found in many Christian sermons preached from Mississippi to Brazil. But on the next page, there’s a switch to phrases strikingly similar to those coined by revolutionary Emiliano Zapata. "It is better to be a master of one peso than a slave of two; it is better to die fighting head on than on your knees and humiliated; it is better to be a living dog than a dead lion." . What’s troubling here is that there is only one undoubtedly "evangelical" phrase in all those that Time quotes, and it is one of then ones said to resemble the aphorisms of Emilio Zapata. "It is better to be a living dog than a dead lion" is a pretty direct borrowing from Ecclesiastes 9.4 in the King James Version: . To him that is joined to all the living, there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion. . http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1911556,00.html.These people have a theology, and we should be studying it.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Mr. Cameron, Excellent analysis and spot-on. What you describe is the difference between an Arab generalist and someone with true domain knowledge (not information exclusively, but understanding and sagacity). I’ve considered before the apparent disconnect between what appears to be cluelessness on the part of our government and the reality of the jihadist intention. While hope is not a strategy, I’m hoping against hope that we’ve got some defectors over at NSA who are giving our guys better insight that what you describe…but then again, hope won’t get one very far.Peter Hopkirk wrote a couple of books in the mid-90s on the Afghan area for a general audience that reveals the gulf between our cultures.Excellent post!
November 4th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
[…] Guest Post: Speak the Languages, Know the Modes of Thought …..A couple of other recent items in the news about languages and translation at home and abroad should concern us.A report from the US Department of Justice on the FBI’s Translation Project was less than enthusiastic, not only finding that significant quantities of material collected in the Bureau’s highest-priority counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence collection categories were never evaluated, but that the number of translators inn the FBI pool had diminished since a 2005 audit, that in 2008 the FBI met its hiring goals for linguists in only 2 of its 14 critical languages, that security clearance and language proficiency training for a new linguist took 19 months before hiring could take place, and that 70 percent of the FBI’s own linguists in the field offices tested did not attend the FBIs required training course. ” […]
November 4th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
charles, i’m glad to see you becoming a feature here.
.
what catches my eye right now is the following point, which is a bit off your main theme today, but i’d like to ask for more about it anyway: “Which powerfully reinforces the idea that bin Laden views his jihad against the US in terms of measured reciprocity — a notion which should give us pause every time we take an action which we would not choose to have taken against us…”
.
what i wonder about is the nature of a mind bent on measured reciprocity vs. a millenarian mind (like those you’ve written about before)? millenarians, i gather, aren’t much into measured tit-for-tat thinking. if they are, then maybe they really aren’t all that millenarian. they may think they are on a righteous, vengeful mission ordained by god — but it’s so tit-for-tat that it falls short of being truly millenarian.
.
or is there a spectrum of combinations? i can imagine a millenarian using tit-for-tat thinking as part of a rationale for wanting to inflict apocalyptic punishment. but i can also suppose that it’s a mental game that a millenarian leader uses to help explain his views to attract new adherents. if so, who/what may be examples of minds that combine millenarian with measured reciprocity?
November 4th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Measured reciprocity is a concept that bin Ladin takes from his interpretation of the Quran and applies to his heterodox millennial revolutionary movement, al-Qaida. It is expressed in numerous speeches and other documents we have from him. The Quran is vast. Its interpretations are many and perhaps as limitless as those who seek guidance from it. When a charismatic leader who commits to violence in defense (his word) of religion, land, and Muslim people singles out a particular Quranic verse or a hadith, then we have a window into his mindset. These windows add up to an understanding of what motivates him and how he is likely to react or pro-actively behave. Thus, editing out religious material, especially the most important revelations from the Quran, from a prophet or messiah’s words is akin to throwing out the baby and keeping the bathwater. Charles’s point is well-taken. It takes more than a translator of words to comprehend al-Qaida’s primary documents, it takes a "worldview translator," who can code the symbolic expression in which religion always presents itself to the world and its devotees.
November 4th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
Great analysis.
.
I wonder, though, how much context properly transcribed/translated jihadist-religious statements would require. I agree that, in these cases, the language and meaning should be retained as much as possible; but my thought is whether it would require a real understanding of Islamic jihadism, in its several forms, to really be able to pick it apart.
.
That is to say, who is the audience? The translation is important, but the underlying jihadism will be lost if the common understanding isn’t there–and while I do think it’s, as you say, problematic that it isn’t present eight years post 9/11 within mainstream culture, I do wonder who would have access to the understanding of jihadist meaning from well-translated texts.
.
Man, I hope this makes sense; I’m not convinced I’m articulating what I want to ask well.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:28 am
A thorough and excellent post. In addition to the very insightful points already made by several commenters, I would just add that in addition to the translation exercise itself and contextual knowledge about these type(s) of groups (and this includes not seeing them all as necessarily "the same"), oftentimes knowledge of history and theology/religious studies related to Islam and Muslim societies is also needed. I know many people who could produce excellent translations of this material, but not really be able to explain its meanings and justifications with the same level of detail or nuance.
Excellent post, Charles. It was a great pleasure to read.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Excellent post Charles – and the comment response has been superb.!
.
What’s troubling, is the stubborn persistence of the IC senior management in the foot dragging, year after year, of an expansion of teachers, translators and analysts in critical languages, often based on antiquated security rules. Charles is correct that the jihadi texts needs to be read from more than just a superficial linguistic viewpoint but we appear unable to even scratch the surface on the need for ppl with competent language skills, never mind cultural depth. Eight years after 9/11 mitigates any excuse for so inadequate a response
November 5th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Thanks, Zen, all:
.
I am delighted to see such an interdisciplinary conversation shaping up here — Jean with her expertise in new religious movements (back in 2001, she was among the very first to analyze AQ from a religious perspective), Ibn Siqilli as an Islamic specialist, and David as a distinguished conflict analyst — this sort of thing is one of the best features of the internet, and I’d like to encourage the dialog to continue…
.
I’ll respond to some of the other points raised here shortly, but David’s post in particular raised some key issues, and with Zen’s gracious permission, I have written a separate post in response which he will be putting up shortly.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:44 am
I’d like to thank J Scott for his comment, and recommendation of Peter Hopkirk’s books.
.
One of my own avenues into Afghan culture is via games, which often have a direct or metaphorical connection of some kind with warfare via the sense of play, fair or otherwise. I highly recommend G Whitney Azoy’s book, Buzkashi: Game and Power in Afghanistan, for that reason.
.
I was also struck by an anecdote Tom Ricks told Fareed Zakariah on the latter’s show recently. He recounted a story first told by John Masters in his book "Bugles and a Tiger", the memoir of a British officer serving with the Gurkhas in Waziristan in the 1930s. At the end of the war, so the story goes, some Afghans approach the British soldier and ask, "Where are our medals?" "You were the enemy," he replies. And here’s the punchline, the Afghan respose to that: "No, no. You gave medals to the Pashtuns on your side. We want our medals, too. You couldn’t have had a good war without us." .Tom Ricks comments, "This is very much the Afghan attitude. This is a kind of sporting event for them in many ways.".Food for thought.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:50 am
Charles–I’ll note that Dexter Filkin had a similar perception of Afghan attitude towards war in his memoir "The Forever War." I think that goes a long way towards shaping our understanding, as Westerners.
November 6th, 2009 at 12:55 am
I am going to post here (with her permission) some comments that Jean Rosenfeld made on my post above and sent me privately, and then follow up with a couple of comments:
.
Jean wrote:
.
.
*.I would just like to single out a few aspects of this comment of Jean’s, and add some brief comments of my own.
.
First, I would like to acknowledge Jean’s emphasis on religion as "imperative", and add that this is particularly the case under end-times scenarios, which (in the words of Stephen O’Leary) shift "the primary function of apocalyptic argument … from persuasion to enactment".
.
Second, Jean mentions poetry as among the things that are deemed snippable when editing jihadist materials. The snippets of poetry are where the most intense emotional charge is present, the heart-thought of the jihadist, and Jean is right, they are highly significant (and, it goes without saying, also require an informed and close reading). And the same is true of dreams, which Jean also mentions — witness the discussion of the dreams of the Twin Towers attack that bin Laden discussed on video. .I am also grateful to her for confirming the significance of reciprocity in bin Laden’s texts.
.
And I would like, above all, to drive home her message about decoding the symbolic expression of the jihadists (she mentioned this in her earlier comment here also, but with a typo so that she wrote "It takes more than a translator of words to comprehend al-Qaida’s primary documents, it takes a ‘worldview translator,’ who can code the symbolic expression in which religion always presents itself to the world and its devotees. " when she intended to write "decoded"). .It’s one of those "breadth AND depth" issues — we need the sheer breadth of linguistic coverage by translators that Zen emphasizes, AND we need the world-view-translating capacity that gives us depth of understanding. Urgently, please.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:54 am
Fixed!
.
I will second Scott’s recommendation of Peter Hopkirk. I will also add to that the works of Third Republic era French scholar Rene Grousset for a sweeping, regional, historical context.
.
Jean wrote:
.
" It reminds me of the document an FBI agent gave to a religious studies scholar to comment on for him: the words the agent regarded as indicative of religion were highlighted with yellow marker, words such as "bible" "church" "prayer" "god." However, the really revelatory "religious" content was not in any of those words, but in aspects of expression that completely flew by the behaviorists and psychologists."
.
I found this really interesting. In genocide studies, perpetrators a priori are often found to have been using allusive "insider language" by slang, metaphor and analogy to signal and rehearse eliminationist intent to initiated followers that escapes outside observers or at least provides some ambiguity or "cover". Such discourse can go on for years, preparing the dehumanization of the intended victims intellectually, long before any concrete action is taken. It would seem that violent religious radicalization takes a similar rhetorical form.
November 6th, 2009 at 6:32 am
David Ronfeldt wrote:
what i wonder about is the nature of a mind bent on measured reciprocity vs. a millenarian mind (like those you’ve written about before)? millenarians, i gather, aren’t much into measured tit-for-tat thinking. if they are, then maybe they really aren’t all that millenarian. they may think they are on a righteous, vengeful mission ordained by god — but it’s so tit-for-tat that it falls short of being truly millenarian.
What I and other colleagues who focus on millenarian groups have found is that the content of their ultimate concerns varies greatly, but there are features of all millenarians that constitute a (provisional) paradigm. So, because bin Ladin may select out particular suras, such as the one Charles pointed out regarding measured reciprocity as a divine imperative, another millenarian group may focus on a different specific text or texts from its parent tradition of doctrines and sacred writings. By identifying a set of categoral features that are derived from many cases, one can identify new groups as varieties of millenarianism, but also expect that any new group will expound its own set of divine imperatives that inspire it to act or behave. A few of my colleagues have been engaged in defining what constitutes types of millenarianism. By identifying a subset of new cases of unorthodox groups as "millenarian," one then expects to find their divinely inspired rules to live and die by in the copious statements they produce. That shortens the time and focuses the mind in the process of analysis and tends to help isolate what is important in their minds, rather than concentrating on what is important about them to us–as seen through our own selective lenses. I hope that is clear. It is hard to put things really clearly in a short post.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:51 am
Zen: is there even a need for this post? I mean, for ’em ragheads, whoever ain’t one of ’em is just simply an infidel. & if I’m not mistaken, it’s Eternal War™ against the rest of us un-believers?
On a different note, in their lingo, the word "innovation" is synonymous with heresy. You can see why they’re not exactly susceptible to change of any sort.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Good day, YT.
.I don’t believe we’ve been introduced, but I note from your many previous comments on Zen’s blog that you’re an educated fellow and acquainted with the classics — likely more so than my poor self — so I did a little googling in search of a suitable rejoinder to your use of the term "raghead", and came up with what Eugene Borza said in response to Thucydides: "The use of barbaros [barbarians] is problematic." ; )
.On the topic of innovation, it seems to me that there’s a creative tension between the avoidance of bida (ie the need to remain faithful to tradition) and the practice of ijtihad (which involves bringing fresh insight to bear on a situation), in a balance that seems to be adjusting even as we speak.
.But something of the sort is true of all living systems, surely — they change and adapt in order to conserve and continue. Roy Rappaport caught this dynamic nicely, I thought, when he wrote "the most salient question to ask concerning any structural change is, "What does this change maintain unchanged?" [Ecology, Meaning and Religion, p. 149]
November 6th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Charles Cameroon,
I think Xenophon has sorta infected me with the usage of the word "barbarian".
& thanks for bringin’ new light to the strange, peculiar OODA loop of these "barbaros" as well. ‘Specially the part ’bout the avoidance of said "b" & the practice of "i". I will make sure I read the rest of ’em earlier comments of yours.
As for bein’ "an educated fellow and acquainted with the classics", unfortunately I must say I’m somewhat lackin’ in that aspect for I’ve just lost a job offer this AM (my side of the planet) due to my lack of a certain requisite Degree (why did the p**** had to talk like a denizen from an overrated minuscule totalitarian-capitalist island-state?). The classics, well I believe our host here is in a stronger position to claim familiarity. I’m an amateur when it comes to Greek, Roman & Byzantine treatises. What lil’ I know ’bout classical works are those from the Far East.
I bid you a pleasant weekend.
YT
P.S.: Sorry, Zen. I know this ain’t the place for letter writin’ of any sort.
November 6th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
"It is better to be a master of one peso than a slave of two; it is better to die fighting head on than on your knees and humiliated; it is better to be a living dog than a dead lion."
Simply inspirin’.
November 6th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Thanks, Karaka, I’ll have to look at Filkin…
November 6th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
The flip side is that high explosive or flying fragments of metal have no Koranic context when set loose. Bullets and bombs, at least on a minimum level of intelligibility, translate into any language or cultural tradition. Socio-cultural subtleties tend to melt away in the heat of an explosion.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
jean — thanks for adding to the clarifications. continually interesting.
.
joseph — okay, but also, as i recall, there are instances where a terrorist group has regarded a particular weapon (e.g., one particular rifle) as having a sacred or magical quality.
.
charles (and zen) — thanks for selecting out my comment for longer attention in that separate subsequent post. i’ve just added a comment there, mostly focused on notions about hubris and nemesis. take a look.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Mr. Fouche, Odd how a little HE can reduce rhetoric and purpose into a deadly mess (reminds me of Bob Duval in Apocolypse Now). And I believe the word "mess" is an apt moniker for the savages bent on our destruction. I’m certain the recently deceased Russell Ackoff would have never anticipated my segue, but in his book, Creating The Corporate Future, he defines a mess as a system "like any system, has properties that none of its parts have. These properties are lost when the system is taken apart." With a little editorial machination, I’d add "blown apart." So, Mr. Fouche you are spot-on.Mr. Cameron’s observations on the importance of language are vital, but on our side we should cease and desist the policing of our language with respect to our enemies and communicate with clarity—and this conversations seems a good place—the mess we’re in with respect to jihadists everywhere. In this mess, we know in real-time the goals of our enemy and as a matter of practicality, reliable HUMIT will be hit and miss for the forseeable future (outside of websites and not-so-true-believers-for-sale), so as a matter of policy we should take their word when they say they want to kill us in large numbers. Much has been written on this topic, much history has been made, and while I’m still kicking myself for debating a colleague for over a year Huntington’s Clash article in FA (I picked the wrong side), I continue to drift back to Bob Kaplan’s little book Warrior Politics. I read this little book on a business trip to the Left Coast and re-read on the ride home. Kaplan points out rightly that the media is a "poor man’s" intel service. We can wring our hands, but as long as we allow leaks by gov’t officials to major media (who see no moral difference between the West and our enemies)—in many quarters the media seems to be pulling for the poor misunderstood jihadists [check out the Ft Hood situation where the bad guy was of the "wrong" religion]. That said, one positive action would be to track-down and prosecute those who leak to the NYTs or any outlet. At home, we’re either at war, or we aren’t—if we’re not, bring home the troops, but if we are, let’s pull out the stops and subdue the enemy. Sorry for the rant…but his situation truly p****es me off, and this is a mess that will be ordered only by clear heads with resolve and integrity.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Joseph Fouche:
.
Quite so. Which is why I prefer to work on the mental, moral and morale issues, before we arrive at such a point.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
David:
.
Joseph’s comment and your follow up put me in mind of the various forms of magical, shamanistic and sacramental weaponry — the sacred shirts of the ghost dance, for instance, and the Cheyenne "stealth" device called Nimhoyoh, the Turner, which their elders told Fr. Powell kept them invisible to the US Cavalry when installed with the appropriate ritual.
.
Fr Powell’s book, Sweet Medicine, impressed me a great deal when I read it some years back.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:45 pm
BTW, YT —
.
I have a comment up about the narco-evangelicals whose text gave you such inspiration, connecting their morality around meth sales and use with a parallel narco-jihadist morality around heroin sales and use, on the Foreign Policy Af/Pak blog — quite an interesting blend of religion, crime, and community building… my comment is below the fold:
.
http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/10/26/british_muslim_gangs_and_the_chemical_jihad
November 7th, 2009 at 12:59 am
Zen:
.
You wrote, " In genocide studies, perpetrators a priori are often found to have been using allusive ‘insider language’ by slang, metaphor and analogy to signal and rehearse eliminationist intent to initiated followers that escapes outside observers or at least provides some ambiguity or ‘cover’. Such discourse can go on for years, preparing the dehumanization of the intended victims intellectually, long before any concrete action is taken. It would seem that violent religious radicalization takes a similar rhetorical form."
.
It’s really all around us. To give you a couple of examples…
.
President George W Bush‘s statement in his Address to the Nation on October 7, 2001, contained the phrase: "the terrorists may burrow deeper into caves and other entrenched hiding places". This, as Bruce Lincoln pointed out in his book, Holy Terrors, "reduced his adversaries to hunted animals, but also gestured toward a climactic scene of the Apocalypse." The scene in question is the one where the great and powerful "hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains", calling to the mountains and rocks to fall on them and hide them from the wrathful face of the Lamb of God. "This vision of cowering evildoers, desperately trying to escape God’s judgment," Lincoln continues, "associates American military attacks with the wrath of the Lord — but it does so by means of "biblical allusions plainly audible to portions of his audience who are attentive to such phrasing, but likely to go unheard by those without the requisite textual knowledge."
.
.
And that’s a perfect complement to bin Laden‘s retreat into the caves at Tora Bora, which as Lawrence Wright points out in The Looming Tower, might look like a purely military-strategic choice, but would have profound symbolic resonance to many within Islam: .
.
The key symbol of bin Laden’s hijira, however, was the cave. The Prophet first encountered the angel Gabriel, who revealed to him, "You are the Messenger of God," in a cave in Mecca. Again, in Medina, when Mohammed’s enemies pursued him, he hid in a cave that was magically concealed by a spiderweb. Islamic art is replete with images of stalactites, which reference both the sanctuary and the encounter with the divine that caves provided the Prophet. For bin Laden, the cave was the last pure place. Only by retreating from society — and from time, history, modernity, corruption, the smothering West — could he presume to speak for the true religion. It was a product of bin Laden’s public-relations genius that he chose to exploit the presence of the ammunition caves of Tora Bora as a way of identifying himself with the Prophet in the minds of many Muslims who longed to purify Islamic society and restore the dominion it once enjoyed. . That too would be an allusion "plainly audible to portions of his audience who are attentive to such phrasing, but likely to go unheard by those without the requisite textual knowledge".
November 7th, 2009 at 3:28 am
Charles, I think the examples you cite @26 hark back to the strongest point you make in this post, namely that the understanding of the context in which agents are speaking provides as great or greater understanding of the meaning of words chosen than translation–which remains very important–necessarily does.
.
In the example from Bush’s rhetoric, his audience was not only the American people and to an extent the rest of the world, but specifically towards his Christian base who would grasp that underlying religious message in addition to the arguably secular one. But even without being a member of that base, it was probably somewhat recognizable as vengeful godful wrath to his listeners.
.
In the second example, it speaks in a similar fashion, and I wonder how accessible that context is without the common understanding of Islam in the manner that Christianity tends to be understood in the United States. It’s why I wondered @4 who the audience is, because of the level of contextual coding inherent in religious and quasi-religious statements such as the two examples you give.
.
But as you say in the post, reading in parallel should be the norm to fully comprehend the meaning both explicit and implicit in this; yet I wonder if it will remain an academic tactic, rather than one of intelligence.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Karaka:
.
You ask, "Who is the audience" — and I am not sure which audience you are asking about? The audience or audiences of the jihadist (or other author of a given text), or the audience I hope will read that text with both linguistic and contextual/religious subtlety, or the audience for whom that scholar/analyst will be writing her or his analysis or brief?
.
The jihadist may incorporate religious allusions in a text either because that’s a natural part of his or her thought process, without particularly noticing it, or deliberately, openly as a declaration of faith (as when quoting sura or hadith) or covertly, as a form of code.
.
The Taliban put out an announcement recently containing the words, "The people refused to vote in the so-called American democratic process under the shade of tanks and mortars", which I discussed in a comment on Ibn Siqilli’s blog, noting what I take to be an ironic echo of the hadith in Bukhari’s collection which reads:
.
Allah’s Apostle said, "Know that Paradise is under the shade of swords."
.
Here, if I am right, the tanks and mortars of the "crusaders" are being contrasted with the (symbolic) swords of the mujahideen.
In this kind of perhaps casual, perhaps deliberate but indirect allusion, the primary audience would be mujahideen and their potential sympathizers, and the result would be an enhanced sense of bonding, of kinship.
Some of the more direct quotations in texts directed towards a "crusader" readership are intended to fulfill the Qur’anic obligation to offer peace with submission to Allah before engaging in battle – a serious obligation, that, and one for which bin Laden was chastised early on when he failed to provide such a call/offer/warning.
.
As to the audience I hope will be performing the kind of close reading at which Bruce Lincoln is adpet — it takes both scholarship and empathy to do it right, and needs to command the respectful attention of those who are briefed on the results, so I suspect it needs to happen fairly high on the foodchain and treated with respect top-down. But I’m no intel expert, so I’ll leave it there for others to pick up and run with…
November 9th, 2009 at 1:47 am
and I am not sure which audience you are asking about?
.
You just identified the audience(s) I was curious about; I was imprecise, but I wanted to know more or less the parties that would read the text (particularly in a context-critical manner) and you did that. Sorry for my imprecision.
.
But I find this quite fascinating, and I wish I knew more. I’m in the process of reading the Oxford edition of the Qu’ran, and The Legacy of Jihad–do you have any suggestions for further reading?
November 9th, 2009 at 3:45 am
Here is Bruce Lincoln‘s reading of the Atta letter, from his book, Holy Terrors.
.
What angle in particular interests you?
November 9th, 2009 at 7:15 am
I’m not sure I know enough to answer that question! But perhaps works that would shed some light on al-Qaeda and also those on Afghan Taliban.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
I’ve no doubt there are people reading here who can provide suggestions that may question or supplement mine, but I would go with Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower, for broad background on AQ up to 9/11, Ahmed Rashid‘s Descent into Chaos for more recent illumination on Afghanistan and Pakistan, then zeroing in, Brynjar Lia‘s Architect of Global Jihad for jihadist theory, and Jamestown and the CTC Sentinel along with specialist bloggers such as Jihadica, Brachman and All Things CT for more up-to-the minute, detailed reports.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Charles Cameron,
.
Re: "connecting their morality around meth sales and use with a parallel narco-jihadist morality around heroin sales and use".
.
We live in interestin’ times indeed.
.
For more articles on
barbariansinteresting blends of religion, crime, and community building, I’d suggest the followin’ below:.
http://www.huguenotcorsair.com/
November 10th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
@Charles
.
Thank you! I actually already purchased Rashid’s Descent, so at least I’m moving in the right direction! I appreciate your taking the time to respond.
November 11th, 2009 at 6:37 am
I was amused to come across this quote today, while reading Abdal-Hakim Murad’s King’s College London seminar-lecture America as a Jihad State: Middle Eastern perceptions of modern American theopolitics, as it describes journalists in the Arab world making just the kind of close reading I’ve been advocating here:
.
.
One key channel has undoubtedly been Christian Arab journalists, whose cultural familiarity with the Bible and with Christian eschatology has allowed them to unravel the famous ‘doublecoding’ in presidential speeches, where apparently innocuous phrases turn out to trigger specific Biblical references important to the religious electorate. Particularly impressive was Al-Hayat’s coverage from Washington during the 2008 elections."
.
.
Funny, the way these things turn up.