Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation”

February 6th, 2010 by zen

I am reminded of Abraham Lincoln’s magnificent Second Inaugural here.  He notes that in the American Civil War, both sides “pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other” and although it is clear where his own allegiance lies, he continues, “let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered – that of neither has been answered fully.”

I too have my preferences: what saddens me most of all, perhaps — for I am before all else a “lover of the lovers of God” — is the way in which religious feeling is used to provide sanction for killing.

But I think the issue cuts deeper even than that, and as I contemplate friend and foe alike — and indeed this dialog between, as Abu Walid puts it, “the (terrorist) and (counter-terrorist)”– I find the need to remember first my own humanity.  In the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who suffered enormous wrongs in the Soviet Archipelago:

Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either – but right through every human heart – and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains … an uprooted small corner of evil.

I too am human: the line runs through my heart, too — and in the final analysis, my response to this dialogue, like the dialogue itself, reaches beyond the issues that divide us, toward our common humanity, and toward peace.

Page 4 of 4 | Previous page

Posted in 4GW, academia, Afghanistan, al qaida, America, blogosphere, Charles Cameron, counterinsurgency, cultural intelligence, extremists, ideas, intellectuals, islamic world, islamist, non-state actors, OSINT, pakistan, psychology, Religion, social science, Strategy and War, terrorism, Theology, theory, tribes, war, web 2.0 | 17 comments

Previous post:
Next post:

  1. Fred Leland:

    February 6th, 2010 at 6:17 pm

    I see a lot of violence in my work  and all I can say to this post is OUTSTANDING and well put. 

  2. Charles Cameron:

    February 6th, 2010 at 11:17 pm

    Thanks, Fred — that means a lot, esp. coming from someone with your background!

  3. zen:

    February 7th, 2010 at 6:19 pm

    Excellent post Charles – I am crafting my own observations on the al-Masri exchange but the high quality of your writing is forcing me to up my game. 😉

  4. GW:

    February 11th, 2010 at 2:16 am

    Trying to understand the motivations of Mr. al-Masri is one thing, but I think you have totally lost the plot.  I won’t recount the litany of terrorist acts against the U.S. from the 1980’s through, most recently the attempted slaughter of hundreds on Christmas Day.  If you "choose to forget," then you are suicidal.  When a person is intent on slaughtering me and mine, I don’t care whether they are a father, a brother, or a son – because before all else, they are a mortal enemy.  This particular one is animalistic and seemingly has no moral bounds beyond the accretion of power.  It is hard to wax poetic about humanity when you have seen children intentionally blown to pieces by the bombs of the al Qaeda terrorists or seen one of their charnal houses of torture.  If in those acts you cannot recognize a fundamental evil at work, then does the concept of evil exist for you, or is everything relative?       

  5. zen:

    February 11th, 2010 at 3:32 am

    Hi GW,
    .
    I think your premises regarding Charles’ position on radical Islam are off base. He’s one of the few people ( Dr. Tim Furnish is another) who has attempted to raise the profile of the very dangerous, apocalyptic-Mahdist strand emerging among radical Islamists before we get caught by surprise.

  6. Watcher of Weasels » Wintery Weasels:

    February 11th, 2010 at 4:08 am

    […] Submitted By: The Glittering Eye – Zenpundit – Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation” […]

  7. Bookworm Room » Watcher’s Council submissions this week:

    February 11th, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    […] Submitted By: The Glittering Eye – Zenpundit – Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation” […]

  8. GW:

    February 12th, 2010 at 11:05 am

    Thank you for responding, Zen.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but what I read in the above post seemed anything but an attempt to raise awareness regarding a "very dangerous, apocalyptic-Mahdist strand emerging among radical Islamists . . ."  That said, since I find this issue of great interest, if you are aware of any links to his work that would correct my alleged misperception, I would both appreciate it and be happy to read them.

    In what way do you see this "apocalyptic-Mahdist strand" as different from the generic Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi strand of Islam that undergirds al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc?  I am not an Arab linguist, so all of my sources are secondary.  But from what I have read from a plethora of sources – such as Bernard Lewis, Tawfiq Hamid, translations of ibn Tamiyah, Churchill, Memri, and numerous others – and what I have learned in discussion with numerous Muslim friends and acquaintances – seems to be that the doctrines of Salafism are apocalyptic in and of themselves.

    I don’t see anything bad coming out of a conversation with al Masri, but beyond perhaps a slightly better light into the thinking of a jihadist, I don’t see any good that will come out of it.  The committed jihadists are not going to suddenly embrace us because Leah agrees with al Masri that Bush tortured people and was an overall s.o.b.  I disagree, but that is irrelevant.  There is a war of ideas to be fought here – and indeed, it is the only means to achieving peace in this conflict.  But that will only be achieved when Salafism is either moderated in its doctrines or rejected by the majority Muslims.  I could write until my fingers bleed on this topic, but will stop here.  Perhaps if you can provide the links and address what my above question, then maybe we can continue this conversation.  At any rate, thank you for the response, Zen     

  9. zen:

    February 12th, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    Hi GW,

    .
    There are significant theological differences between Mahdists and Salafists ( and between Sunni Mahdists and Shia Mahdists). The most famous recent example of the former in the context of KSA, was the terror group that seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca in 1979. For security studies purposes, mahdists are far less predictable, consumed with imminent end times and ( if following a self-declared Mahdi) potentially unbound by the normal strictures of Islam. However, Charles will be better at speaking for himself than my giving you secondhand information, so I will ping him and give him a chance to respond to your questions and concerns.

  10. Charles Cameron:

    February 12th, 2010 at 9:16 pm

    Hi, GW — and thanks for your follow up post.

    what I read in the above post seemed anything but an attempt to raise awareness regarding a "very dangerous, apocalyptic-Mahdist strand emerging among radical Islamists"  … if you are aware of any links to his work that would correct my alleged misperception, I would both appreciate it and be happy to read them.

    I don’t know that I have any posts that are neatly squared off to deal explicitly and only with apocalyptic in Sunni jihadism, but https://zenpundit.com/?p=3193 talks about the apocalyptic strands in both Iran and al-Q, https://zenpundit.com/?p=3247 gets into the idea of "hastening the apocalypse" which applies both to Shi’i and Sunni eschatology, and https://zenpundit.com/?p=3311 deals with the eschatological meaning of Khorasan — while for what it’s worth, I talk about American eschatology in https://zenpundit.com/?p=3282.  For in depth treatment of matters of Sunni Mahdism, I would refer you to David Cook’s Studies in Muslim Apocalyptic as well as his Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature which is more directly relevant to current trends, and to Tim Furnish’s Holiest Wars: Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads, and Osama bin Laden.

    In what way do you see this "apocalyptic-Mahdist strand" as different from the generic Wahhabi / Salafi / Deobandi strand of Islam that undergirds al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. … the doctrines of Salafism are apocalyptic in and of themselves.

    I think that some level of Mahdism is present in almost all Islam that doesn’t directly refute the Mahdist hadith (or interpret them as applying exclusively to Jesus, which is effectively a ort of borderline Mahdism), and all Islam is apocalyptic to some extent, since belief in Judgment Day is made a qualification of belief in the Qur’an:

    Those who disbelieve say: The Hour will never come unto us. Say: Nay, by my Lord, but it is coming unto you surely. (He is) the Knower of the Unseen. Not an atom’s weight, or less than that or greater, escapeth Him in the heavens or in the earth, but it is in a clear Record. — Qur’an 34.3

    Similarly, anyone who recites the Christian Nicene creed affirms of Christ "And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead" (BCP) or words to that effect" — so the Second Coming is affirmed in the Creed.  But not every Christian is as engaged in end times expectation as John Hagee, and not every Muslim is as engaged in end times speculation as Sheikh al-Hawali..I’d like to thank Zen for responding to your earlier post, and comment a little on his second.  He writes:

    There are significant theological differences between Mahdists and Salafists ( and between Sunni Mahdists and Shia Mahdists). The most famous recent example of the former in the context of KSA, was the terror group that seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca in 1979. For security studies purposes, mahdists are far less predictable, consumed with imminent end times and (if following a self-declared Mahdi) potentially unbound by the normal strictures of Islam.

    I wouldn’t so much point to a difference between Salafists and Mahdists as suggest that Mahdism is a strand in Salafi thought and Islamic tradition in general that can carry with it a wide range of different scenarios, ranging from al-Hawali’s prediction of the fall of Jerusalem in 2012 to expectation that the Mahdi will be the next and final mujadid, appearing at the start of the next Islamic century in 2076 CE — and indeed to Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri’s 2009 proclamation that "there are at least 774 years until Imam Mahdi (AS) can be born". Short-term, fervent Mahdist expectation is a volatile ingredient to add to an already violent mix.  Dr Furnish characterizes it this way:

    Muslim messianic movements are to fundamentalist uprisings what nuclear weapons are to conventional ones.

    I’d like to lay stress on the word "fervent" in my previous sentence. Damian Thompson, in Waiting for Antichrist, has laid out in detail how it is possible to be a member of an overtly apocalyptic group with strong emphasis on the "soon coming" — and still behave as though the expected end of time is partitioned off in a sort of belief-zone in the mind, allowing one (for example) to invest in forms of insurance where the expected payoff is well beyond the expected date for the end of the world….The issue, therefore, is with the arising of a movement of fervent and immediate expectation — and AQ was apparently concerned enough about this possibility in its own ranks that in 2003 it issued a statement to "tamp down the fervor of Mahdist expectations among its followers and sympathizers" as Dr Furnish puts it. 

  11. Watcher of Weasels » Imaginary Friends and The Trick of the Tail:

    February 13th, 2010 at 4:39 pm

    […] Fifth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Zenpundit – Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation” […]

  12. Walter Sobchak:

    February 16th, 2010 at 2:37 am

    "Abu Walid’s questions, … , are largely focused on issues of due process"

    Because due process is the process that is due, it is entirely contextual.

    What is due to an adult citizen is not the same as what is due to a juvenile. And what is due to an alien is different, and less than, what is due to a citizen. What is due to a uniformed soldier of a party to the Geneva Conventions is defined by the conventions.

    Non-uniformed jihadis are due very little. Like pirates, they are enemies of all mankind, they are entitled to appear before the Captain and say something in their defense before he orders them to be hanged. Any other treatment, including incarceration until the war is over or his natural life ends, is a mercy to them.

    They may be questioned, and treated harshly if they are uncooperative. Beating, water-boarding, short rations, unpleasant conditions and being forced to listen to judas priest for hours on end are all within bounds. Permanent physical injury and the sadistic infliction of pain for the pleasure of the inflicter are torture and we restrain ourselves from them. Psychological digs, like been run around naked by midget hillbilly chicks, or being slathered in menstrual blood by naked female interrogators are only a problem for the weak of will, but that does not make them torture.

  13. Bookworm Room » Last week’s Watcher’s Winners:

    February 16th, 2010 at 2:37 am

    […] Fifth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Zenpundit – Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation” […]

  14. 2012 Planet alignment - the end?:

    April 21st, 2010 at 8:30 am

    2012 Planet alignment – the end?…

    Survival Guides for 2012 Even if we knew about the 2012 Prophecies for many years- now is that we must consider these prophecies and amazing men and civilizations they came from. Survival Guides 2012- In- Depth knowledge Infromation and Prophecies for …

  15. Watchers Council Nominations – Global Warming Edition | Mere Rhetoric:

    May 2nd, 2010 at 7:43 pm

    […] – Why Fear Big Government? * Submitted By: The Glittering Eye – Zenpundit – Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation” * Submitted By: American Digest – Doug Ross Journal – The Sublime, Timeless Wisdom of […]

  16. Ab? Wal?d Responds to Charles Cameron « al-Maktabah – ???????:

    June 7th, 2010 at 6:30 am

    […] months ago, al-Ma?r? recently responded to Charles Cameron. See Cameron’s original post here. For background on the dialogue see: “Hotline to Jihad.” Below is an unedited copy of […]

  17. Charles Cameron:

    February 2nd, 2012 at 10:54 pm

    In section v of my letter to Abu Walid al-Masri above, I mention my Scots ancestry and quote a Scottish historian as saying:

    the Highlander, like the Arab, attached an almost sacred importance to the guest participating in his bread and salt.

    I was somewhere between amused and amazed, therefore, to read the following today in Michael Semple‘s working paper Rhetoric of resistance in the Taliban’s rebel ballads:

    I was more than a little impressed to find that a fellow seeker of the truth about the Taliban, in the pursuit of relationship which must underpin such understanding, had succeeded in bringing a founder of the Taliban Movement to Scotland. It seems that the senior Talib was captivated by the combination of tribes, tartans and deer-stalking in the mountains. Should we be surprised that an Afghan, associated with a Movement reputed to approach all issues from the perspective of Shariat, should bond so well with Scotland? Apparently the imaginative encounter between the Afghan cleric and the Scottish moor is but another iteration of a two hundred year process which had linked the identities of the gun-toting men in these two remote parts of the world.

    I’d love to know more about that story. But you should read Semple in any case, for an insight into the Taliban that comes from a perspective grounded in the lived and lively culture of the Afghan…