The Jihad’s Position in Post-Cold War Metaphysical Politics A Review of: Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality, Modernity

Faisal Devji’s book, Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality, Modernity, develops an intriguing analysis of the role of the Islamic “jihad”, led by the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda, against the “West” within the construct of post-Cold War global political and religious chaos. The initial argument in Chapter 1, “Effects without Causes” aims to deconstruct American perceptions of the jihad created within the 9/11 Commission Report and elucidate its dualistic association between traditional Islam and a globalizing world. On the first page, Devji flips one of key arguments located toward the end 9/11 Commission Report, that in a sense, they [Al-Qaeda] were more globalized that we [the U.S.] were, on its head. Devji claims that the jihad is more global than the United States (U.S.) not because of its control over people or territory but because it is too weak to participate in such politics of control that were dominate during the Cold-War. He furthers this discussion on page 20, when he formulates his two overarching themes for the book. First, he claims that the jihad achieves globalization within a landscape of purely accidental relations, which he defines earlier as the effects from conditions, such as the East African attacks or the jihad’s transnational commercialism, in which a network like Al-Qaeda becomes global beyond politics of intentionality. Second, he argues that a consequence of the jihad outgrowing the global political landscape during the Cold-War, is that a “new kind of Muslim” is created that is not bound by the traditional cultic uniformity of Islam during that period. These two themes, which are consistent throughout the book, create an innovative and sophisticated analysis of the global jihad.

Scholarship attempting to explicate the global political order after the end of the Cold War is one of the largest fields within international relations (IR). Preeminent scholars such as: Samuel P. Huntington, Philip Bobbitt, and Francis Fukuyama, all have published extensive research concerning the landscape of the post-Cold War world order. Devji’s first theme fits within this academic discussion by incorporated the global movement of the jihad within the field. After providing the historical context for this latest jihad in chapter 2, “A Democratic History of Holy War,” which is bogged down with extremely long and convoluted history, Devji presents his initial evidence for his argument that the jihad exists within a globalized, stateless world. In Chapter 3, “Monotheistic Geographies” under the subheading, a metaphysical war, he states that, “the war itself is also a metaphysical one between Christians, Muslims and Jews… but what gives these battles global meaning is nothing less than a metaphysical war.” He uses the word metaphysical to assert that the war is based on abstract phenomena, such as culture and civilizations, rather than territory state citizenship.

This argument is similar to that of Samuel P. Huntington in his book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, in which Huntington argues that in the post-Cold War world, for the first time in world history, global politics has become multipoloar and multicivilizational and that a clash among these civilizations for global civilizational dominance is inevitable. According to Devji, the Islamic jihad is not being waged from a single geographical region but within the global imperial arms of Americanized globalization. This associates the jihad with a new global category, in which geographical, financial, and technological mobility flows through states. In Chapter 4, “Media and Martyrdom” he provides some credence to his argument by claiming that the mobility of technology through the global media galvanizes a globally fragmented but ethically connected Islamic community to join the jihad. The arguments constructed by Devji’s in association with the Huntington’s work correlate in an interesting way to form an intriguing perspective of the power relationship between the “West” and the Islamic jihad in the post-Cold War globalized political structure.

Some of Devji arguments concerning the global position of the jihad in relation to the U.S. are however slightly short sided. Devji develops the argument that the jihad has become an impossible enemy of the U.S. because it exists beyond America’s war-making potential. This argument assumes that the only tool in which the U.S. maintains global hegemony is confounded in their military dominance. However, Devji does not fully take into consideration theories concerning the power of economic liberalism. International trade and globalizing markets affect the authority of the U.S. and the jihad within the global framework. Some affects of globalization such as the effectiveness of the jihad and transnational organized crime syndicates offer challenges to U.S. national security, however, the peace and security preserved by the interconnectivity of global markets provides the U.S. with security beyond their military might. Philip Bobbitt argues in his book, The Shield of Achilles: War, Peace, and the Course of History that the market-state has emerged as the new constitutional order at the conclusion of the Cold War The argument that the global market could dictate national or transnational strategy offers a different approach to the global landscape after the Cold War. Devji does not consider this approach throughout the book and the political economy of the jihad is left unquestioned.

The second major theme within Landscapes of the Jihad is the implications of the religion on the global jihad movement. He argues that jihad not only does not exist alongside traditional forms of Islamic devotion but also actively subverts traditional Islam. He does recognize that the at least part of genealogy of the jihad originates within some historical context with Sunni Islam and the Middle East, however, he vehemently asserts that this new global movement – known as the jihad – possesses an extraordinarily diverse membership that is not united by the way of any cultic ideology or ideological commonality and can only function as a global network that disrupts old-fashioned forms of political and religious allegiance. Chapter 5, “The Death of God” elaborates on this notion of a new kind of Muslim whose character is defined by his attitude toward the law. Devji argues that the jihad represents an ethical rather than a distinctly political or religious global movement. He comes to this reasoning because the jihad is linked neither to projects of liberation, nor to religious texts or norms in any coherent way. Therefore, he claims that Osama Bin Laden justification of the violence he has managed is not meant merely to defend Muslims or retaliate against their enemies, but to regain self-respect. Devji’s argument distorts the common American perception of a religious orientated jihad movement constructed by the media and President Bush’s “crusadic” rhetoric and develops the notion of a modern and ethical jihad movement.

This is a somewhat valid argument, because in order for the jihad to exist within the construct of modern globalization it must also exist within a new modern religious paradigm. However, Devji hints at traditional religious associations that influence the characteristic of the jihad creating contradictions within his own argument. The tri-lateral monotheistic relationship between Islam, Judaism, and Christianity has inflicted numerous wars over the last thousand years. The current conflictual relationship between Judaism and Islam was developed due to the creation of the state of Israel in the Middle East in 1948. According to Devji, “Osama Bin Laden inveighs against Jews only to warn Christians not be drawn into their battles with Muslims.” This antagonism is meant to sway Christians from siding with Jews but using this anti-Semitic rhetoric in a position of power to incite religious emotions from Muslim communities begs the question whether Devji’s arguments that the jihad exists beyond traditional Islamic paradigms are valid. Devji even quotes Bin Laden who said in 2001 that, “Jihad is a duty to liberate Al-Aqsa [the Dome of the Rock mosque in Jerusalem] and to help the powerless in Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon and in every Muslim country.” Therefore, it seems that the primary objective of the jihad still exists at least partially within the framework of the traditional Islamic plight of the Palestinians against the Israelis. Devji’s use of these statements from the leaders of the global jihad seems to dispel his notions that the characteristics of the jihad are not formed by cultic traditional paradigms of Islam.

Devji’s major arguments throughout, Landscapes of the Jihad, truly develop an intriguing perspective on the political, ethical, and religious role of the jihad in the post-Cold War geopolitical structure. Although some of his insights do not take into account some of the theories and historical contexts in which the jihad exists, the book effectively reorients misperceptions concerning the jihad in the U.S. by developing a theory for the ethical and global framework of the jihad. Although Francis Fukuyama argues that the end of the Cold War represented an end of history, deriving from Hegelian principals of ideology, some of Devji’s arguments concerning the modern, globalizing, and ethical jihadist ideology suggests that history may not quite be over yet.








References

Bobbitt, Philip. The Shield of Achilles: War, Peace, and the Course of History. New York: Anchor Books, 2002. 211.

Devji, Faisal. Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality, Modernity. Ithaca, New York: Cornell UP, 2005.

Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Maxwell Macmillan International, 1992.

Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 1996. 21-28.