|
President Apostate?
Edward Luttwak, New York TimesBARACK OBAMA has emerged as a classic example of charismatic leadership a figure upon whom others project their own hopes and desires. . . . One danger of such charisma, however, is that it can evoke unrealistic hopes of what a candidate could actually accomplish in office regardless of his own personal abilities. Case in point is the oft-made claim that an Obama presidency would be welcomed by the Muslim world. . . . As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mothers Christian background is irrelevant. Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him. His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is irtidad or ridda, usually translated from the Arabic as apostasy, but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victims family may choose to forgive). With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. . . . It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Irans Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities. One thing to point out: the governments in most "Muslim" countries are simple thugocracies. Iran and Saudi are religious dictatorships; in Syria and Egypt and most other places, they're simple dictatorships. The only faith motivating the government of Syria, for example, is an unwavering belief that Baby Assad is and should be the absolute ruler of Syria. Islam got nothin' to do with it. Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing. At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards. As a matter of pure self-interest, nobody would want to have a US president assasinated on their soil and have it look like an inside job--so they'll maintain airtight security and just ignore the theological implications. More broadly, most citizens of the Islamic world would be horrified by the fact of Senator Obamas conversion to Christianity once it became widely known as it would, no doubt, should he win the White House. Or, just as likely, most wouldn't care much one way or the other, but they would notice the contradiction between the strict "death to all apostates!" pronouncement and the actual behavior of the local thugocracy. What further effects that might have would be unknown. This would compromise the ability of governments in Muslim nations to cooperate with the United States in the fight against terrorism, as well as American efforts to export democracy and human rights abroad. That an Obama presidency would cause such complications in our dealings with the Islamic world is not likely to be a major factor with American voters, and the implication is not that it should be. But of all the well-meaning desires projected on Senator Obama, the hope that he would decisively improve relations with the worlds Muslims is the least realistic.
Posted by: Mike 2008-05-12 |
|
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=238894 |