 |
27 July, 2009 4:27 PM
|
 |
         |
 |
| Newsletter No. 1190
POLICE BUST IRANIAN DRUG RING IN UPSCALE TOKYO There were two drug cases prominently reported on TV last night that scandalized the nation. Two university students from elite Keio University were busted for selling and buying a small amount of marijuana. By American standards, this hardly seems like a major national story, but in Japan it is. Second, a professional Iranian drug ring that allegedly sold cocaine and other illegal stimulants was broken up. The five Iranians arrested were accused of selling drugs to about seventy people a day on the streets of upscale residential areas in Tokyo’s Minato Ward. They were said to have made an estimated US$200,000 a month, which came to total sales of about US$2 million since November last year. The police believe that this ring sold drugs about 20,000 times before their arrests. Their customers were mostly Japanese, including homemakers and company employees. The ringleader was 42-year-old Abolfazl Zarbali, who has repeatedly entered Japan on fake passports since around 1996. He moved into operating in upscale residential areas in Tokyo after police efforts to crack down on drug dealing in downtown areas intensified. On TV last night, a hidden-camera scene of Zarbali (or one of his associates) passing drugs to a female Japanese customer was broadcast. Zarbali himself was quoted as commenting: “The Japanese are rich and never fail to pay, so it was easy doing business here. But I came to wonder if Japan is really all right when there are so many people buying drugs.” The police believe that there are about ten other Iranian drug rings operating in the Tokyo region.
1) From Michael Penn of the Shingetsu Institute on October 31, 2008: Two Shingetsu Members have complained privately about the fact that the story about Iranian drug dealers was sent out under the title “Islam in Japan.” Since this has raised some concern, I’d like to clarify what the title means in this context. I realize that the story has very little to do with “Islam” in Japan, and more to do with certain “Muslims” in Japan. However, the heading “Islam in Japan” is the one that we have been using for more than three years about anything touching on the activities of Muslims inside this country. If you visit our “Islam in Japan” page at the website, you will find that the Newsletter Archives for that section include issues that have nothing to do with Islam as a religion. The story conveyed in Shingetsu Newsletter No. 1190 is significant in terms of the Japanese perception of resident Iranians (Iranjin) in particular. It was among the lead stories on many TV news broadcasts last night, and has been covered by all the major newspapers. Drug dealing and petty crime was the major reason why Japanese immigration authorities cracked down on Iranian immigrants at the end of the 1990s. In the mid-1990s, Iranians were coming to Japan in much larger numbers than is the case today. The Iranian drug dealer story is filed under the “Islam in Japan” category only because it is relevant to the status and conditions of Muslims in Japan, not for religious or political reasons. The other category that I had considered was “Iran Political,” but I went with “Islam in Japan” because it was a purely domestic Japan matter.
I believe that it is never academically appropriate or fair-minded to include criminal acts under the name of any religion. If one does so, then he / she is no more than one of those popular journalists lacking professionalism and knowledge about the topics that he / she ridicules. There are unfortunately many facts that the Japanese media -- this country in which I live -- does not cover. For example, news about immigrants of other religious origins involved in inhumane, not only criminal, acts. These problems which one can see daily in Roppongi, Shibuya, and so many other places, are rarely talked about. They are rightly not included under the name of Judaisim or Christianity. I do believe you should reconsider your categorization and conceptualization of the entity “Islam in Japan” so that its content will be devoted to the Islamic movement in Japan, and not to the criminal acts perpetrated by some persons of an Islamic origin. These acts must be dealt with in a manner that makes clear that they are not originating from Islam. Otherwise, you will merely perpetuate the stereotyped and stereotyping image of Islam and Muslims that old Orientalism, colonial discourse, and Western as well as Japanese media are teeming with. You will drive us back to a colonial / imperial past full of misconceptions, prejudices, discrimination, and vilification of other peoples. The answer to the fallacies of the past are articulated in the writings of postcolonial authorities such as Edward Said, Homi Bhabha, and many others. If an academic effort is to be made to treat the Islamic issue in Japan by the Shingetsu Institute, it must not suggest the criminalization of any religion. The Iranian drug dealers news, being categorized under the label “Islam in Japan,” goes beyond imputing such an abhorred criminal act to persons of their country of origin; it also imputes it to a whole religion, which is Islam in this case. I strongly insist that this news should be sent under a different title -- or to withdraw it completely -- for there is no academic need to send such newsletters, especially as Shingetsu is not a news outlet but an academic research site, according to my understanding.
The purpose of the categorization scheme that I have been using is not to offend anyone or to perpetuate stereotypes. Perhaps this would be a good opportunity to refine our categorization system in this regard. I am open to suggestions from the full membership as to how we might avoid in the future the problems pointed out by Abdelghanie Ennam. The Shingetsu Newsletter does report news -- irregardless of whether that news is welcome news or unwelcome news to each and every member of this community. That is not going to change. On the other hand, I do appreciate member feedback inasmuch as it can help us make refinements that better serve us all. I encourage members to send me your specific suggestions in this regard.
Sometimes there is a connection between Islam and crimes, for example the view of Kuffars’ property as being fair game or in traditions of piracy. I am not saying this was the case in this piece of news, but I believe we should be very careful before accepting any form of censorship. I don’t agree with each and every newsletter, but it has never occurred to me to complain or threaten to withdraw.
Professor Ennam’s remarks aimed at breaking down stereotypes are well taken. The intellectual task of the Institute is to help disseminate the scholarly and popular works which do precisely that, while at the same time recognizing the very nature of the communities being addressed and discussed. The clearest illustration of my point may just confront us in the US presidential election. Does the identification of criminal suspects by the police as a 30-year-old African American or a 20-year-old Caucasian so pollute the society as to make it impossible to elect a black man as president? If it does, and we will know in a few days if there is the so-called Bradley effect -- then the task is to overcome the racism, not to hide the identity of a perpetrator. If anything, it behooves us to increase our educational function.
Dr. Ennam raises a valid concern. The labels we use are considerably important and, if not applied carefully, may communicate messages that we don’t wish to convey, distort our academic findings, and, more importantly, may be inaccurate and unfair. Should the media and scholars have labeled the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, a Christian terrorist? Should the same Christian label be used when talking about the Ku Klux Klan? Both are known to justify their actions using Christianity and their perceived threats to Christianity. Yet, the former has overwhelmingly been portrayed as simply a disturbed young male who has been challenged socially and economically in life. Yes, he got tied up with a Christian-based militia movement, but the media is very careful not to let that tarnish Christians as a community. The latter is labeled a racist group, not a Christian racist group, despite regular use of crucifixes during ceremonies. Are the impoverished Muslim immigrants who have rioted in the 2000s in France to be considered Muslims first? Immigrants first? Or socially and economically neglected French citizens? They were joined by impoverished immigrants of other religious persuasions, but the media, incorrectly in my estimation, chose to focus on their Muslim heritage. And are Italian mafia members or Colombians who deal drugs internationally considered Catholic drug dealers? No, even though they have ties to the local Catholic religious hierarchy and religious symbolism and rituals are important parts of their organizations. Is it clear, even, that the Iranian drug dealers in question are Muslim? Is this assumption being made by the Japanese press? It is possible they are Zoroastrian, Jewish, or Christian (although these together comprise only 2% of Iran’s reported religious communities). Moreover, should we be focusing on their ethnicity and not their citizenship? They may self-identify more strongly and mobilize around being Persian, Azeri, Kurd, Arab, or Turk. The Iranian drug dealers are news for our forum if and when the incident impacts relations between Japan and the self-declared Islamic government of Iran… or Islamic leaders in Japan come to their defense (or condemnation) using Islam as a mobilizing tool… or if Japanese citizens, politicians, and media latch onto Islamic labels. The stories here would not be about the drug dealers, per se, but about how they are being labeled and framed by various actors.
I do not agree with Abdelghanie Ennam that the category “Islam in Japan” should be devoted to the “Islamic movement in Japan” (which sounds like the category should be concerned only with Islamist militants in Japan, and begs the question of how the “Islamic movement” should be defined). However, it may be a good idea to rename the category “Muslims in Japan” since I don’t think anyone would claim that every Muslim is an exemplar of the religion, any more than any Christian, Buddhist, or Hindu (etc.) is an exemplar of theirs, despite the fact that all these religions are judged by outsiders on the basis of the behavior of their self-proclaimed adherents. The question of who is or is not a Muslim is not simple, even in Islamic law, and should not be assumed. I would be curious to know how Mr. Ennam would define the “Islamic movement in Japan” and how he would define the limits of Islam, specifically whom he would consider to be a Muslim and whom he would not. I do not believe these are easy questions, and they have been the subject of much discussion, among not only Islamic scholars and scholars of Islam but even the general public, both Muslim and non-Muslim.
I thank all the professors who have replied so far to the concern of unintentionally criminalizing Islam through imputing to it criminal acts perpetrated by some Iranian nationals in Japan. This was included under the label “Islam in Japan” without, as it seems, without confirming their religious origin, especially as Iran is home for several spiritual faiths besides Islam, as Professor Leavitt has pointed out. My concern with the label “Islam in Japan” is not to exercise censorship, but to distinguish the mission of genuine academia and scholarship from unverified cultural, ideological, and religious stereotypes and biases. We sometimes, maybe out of innocent indifference, take for granted what seriously needs our critical care and attention. Islam should not be branded as a monolithic epithet, because it is not so. Islam should be judged by what it is, and by how its observant adherents act, not by what those who belong to it only in name, but whose acts and manners are out of sync with its teachings and recommendations. If one traces peoples’ wrongdoings to their religious origins, most Christian and Jewish foreigners, especially youth in Japan, might arguably depicted as “lustful drunkards,” a depiction that would be very much applicable to a large number of Muslims in this country too. Professor Leavitt has eloquently and concretely clarified this point. I understand Dr. Philips’ disagreement, and I acknowledge his questions about how to define the identity of the Islamic presence in Japan. These are basic questions, among many others, that the Shingetsu Institute seems not to have taken seriously before launching its “Japanese-Islamic Relations” mission. Actually, when one looks at this academic mission, one finds it no different from its predecessors in Western, at least Anglo-American, universities which have mostly, to leave room for exceptions if any, reduced so-called “Islamic Studies” to the political, economic, and, to a lesser extent, socio-cultural developments taking place in Islamic countries. By way of comparison, Islamic Studies at universities in Islamic countries are established to study and research Islam as a “Deen” -- a religion, not as political and economic developments. This is the case at least in Morocco, my country of origin. They deal with Islam as:
2- A Shariah (law system) that organizes the relation between Man and his Creator, between people(s), and between Man and the World (local and global) 3- A comprehensive lifestyle that is adaptable to all times and places for its regenerative power and its openness to man-made wisdom, irrespective of origin. 4- A comprehensive system of thought and thinking, of culture and civilization 5- A political, social, and economic system 6- An ethical and educational system 7- An Ummah, an aggregate of nations / peoples / states, which constitutionally acknowledge Islam as their official religion, and according to which partly or wholly conduct thier political, economic, and social lives among themselves and with the rest of the world.
The appellation “Islamic movement” is not meant to imply Islamic militancy in Japan, simply because there are no Muslim militants in the “Hamasist,” “Jihadist,” or “Hezbollahist” sense in Japan. There is no contextual need for such militancy because Japan is not Israel occupying the Palestinian territories; nor is it the United States occupying Iraq and Afghanistan through local emasculated puppet governments. The appellation “Islamic movement” comes from the long tradition of what is known in most Islamic countries as “Al-Haraka Al-Islamiyya,” or “Al-Tiyyar Al-Islami” -- the Arabic for “Islamic Movement” and “the Islamic Current” respectively. The word “movement” can roughly refer to the religious, socio-economic, educational, and cultural efforts being made, especially by the Muslim associations and Masjids (mosques which are 42 in number), around Japan. I think this is what one should target if he or she wants to study the Islamic / Muslim condition in Japan under the label “Islam in Japan,” not criminal acts committed by clandestine individuals of an Islamic origin, if they are at all. One should be careful so as not to be driven by the politicized premises according to which such administrations as Bush’s conceptualized the buzzword “terrorism” to wage a needless war against Iraq -- a war that has tarnished US leadership, betrayed its dwindling hegemony, exacerbated insecurity and instability in the Middle East, fueled anti-Western / American sentiments, and recently contributed to the current unprecedented global financial crisis. If Bush Administration had directed most of their efforts after 9.11 to mending the American ailing economy, there might have been no severe global financial crisis now. I call upon Shingetsu Institute to hold a seminar or a forum or a conference about how to define, conceptualize, and approach Islam and the emigrant Muslim community in the Japanese context, as the Institute specializes in the Japanese-Islamic Relations. I am quite sure this event can generate common ground, according to which the Institute will treat Islam and Muslims and those relations in an academically- and scholarly-reasonable way without perpetuating the conceptual and textual lacunae regarding Islam and its followers in the Western literary, philosophical, ideological, political, and socio-cultural traditions. One cannot help but call for a de-Westernized vision and treatment of Islam from within and from without in academia in the sense that a well-contextualized deconstruction of the prejudices, stereotypes, and biases perpetuated in those traditions need be carried out and culminate in a conceptually-correct understanding and handling of Islam and Muslims. I am not calling here for the renunciation of the Western view of the world while centering a non-Western alternative, but instead drawing the attention to the need for a conceptually and philosophically correct approach to Islam and Muslims. This is not to be understood as a call exclusively to Shingetsu Institute, but to any academic site sharing the same concern. Still, the Shingetsu Institute can take the initiative and lead. Why not?
Concerning the comments made by Abdelghanie Ennam on the concept of the Ummah: “An Ummah, an aggregate of nations / peoples / states, which constitutionally acknowledge Islam as their official religion, and according to which partly or wholly conduct their political, economic, and social lives among themselves and with the rest of the world.” The question arises what the status of territories where Muslims are a minority is. In political Islam, we have the distinction between Dar el Islam (territories under Islamic rule) and Dar el Harb (literally “House of War,” the rest of the World) and the ultimate objective of conquering the Dar el Harb. I am not saying of course that all Muslims adhere to this view, but we cannot just dismiss it. On a more practical level, a number of debates have arisen in countries with recent Muslim immigration on the relationship with the local legal system and Islamic law (although often it is rather customs, sometimes pre-Islamic, from their countries of origin), and a range of views have appeared, from complete integration on one extreme, to the creation of separate personal legal systems on the other, with many positions in-between. For example, the London Times has been following the creation of Islamic Tribunals in the UK, which have been set up as arbitration courts, taking advantage of pre-existing legislation on arbitration. I believe it would interesting to follow this debate in Japan, if and when it arises, taking into account its unique Japanese characteristics, due to factors such as the relative size of the Muslim community, its ethnic origins, or the fact that Japan has never been under Islamic rule in the past.
I support John Edward Philips’ suggestion to change the category from “Islam in Japan” to “Muslims in Japan.” Perhaps we should make a similar change for countries where Muslims are minorities, i.e., the Philippines, and Japan is engaging their communities or involved in political issues related to their communities.
I support this suggestion that we create a file of “Muslims in Japan” instead of “Islam in Japan.” However, when it comes to minorities; it does not matter if we put them under the label of “Islam in Japan,” or “Islam in the Philippines,” since Islam considers itself universal and non-bordered. My other argument is that there is no utopian Islam in daily life. Islam is both what is in the theological books, as well as what its people experience everyday. In the words of the Moroccan philosopher Abdallah Laroui: There is no borderline between Spiritual Islam and Historical Islam. Since we are an institute strongly related to Humanities and Social Sciences, we cannot easily become a victim of the logic of any theology which rejects any behavior which does fit in with the sources. Islam is what we read as well what we experience and see.
I don’t want to repeat the former comments, but I think that the topic of the newsletter was not fit for the content. 1- We don’t know if they are Muslim or not. 2- Their ID cards (passports) show their nationality. Why are we interested in their religions? Do they identify themselves as a Muslim or Iranian? 3- They sell drugs and we use title “Islam in Japan” right? Who buys the drugs? Buying drugs is also illegal and if the buyers are Buddhists or Christians. In such a case, should we use the title Buddhism in Japan or Christianity in Japan? 4- Let’s imagine that a Japanese killed someone in Turkey (for example). What would you feel if you saw a title in the newspapers like Buddhisim or Shintoism in Turkey? 5- I think that recently Muslims are very sensitive about these matters because there are some terrorists using the name of Islam. In this context, we should be so careful in order not to misunderstand. 6- I am late to comment because I was in China-Xinjiang, so forgive me.
As an ordinary Japanese, I can say that the impression or image of Islam (or Muslims) inside Japan is very bad. I remember that one Japanese assistant professor at Tsukuba University, who translated The Satanic Verses into Japanese, was killed by having his throat cut (it was generally suspected that the culprit was Iranian). This happened in 1991 in his office at the university. That murder shocked all Japanese, including me. This would seem to be a crime related to religion. I did not remember the precise time (maybe in the 1990s), but whenever I used to visit Ueno Park in Tokyo, there were so many Iranians who tried to buy used telephone cards from us and also to sell forged telephone cards made from used telephone cards. Their work was surely connected to the Japanese or Chinese or Korean crime syndicates. Later, it seems, some of them turned into drug dealing to make more money. This kind of crime, of course, is not related to Islam. In the recent exchange of views, I noticed that the views of Japanese are completely missing, so I have made the above personal comments. In that line, I consider the “Muslims in Japan” category to be valid as a clarification. Please understand also that I know that Iranians, and also Arabic-speaking peoples, are generally friendly to Japan and the Japanese people. I myself am working in Dubai now.
I have followed this discussion. When several members showed their concern about this matter, it’s only because we wanted this newsletter to pave its own way and not to follow in the steps of mainstream media. It’s not about censorship as some rushed to judge! The discussion was raised due to the classification of the Iranian drug dealers story under the “Islam in Japan” category. The basic question is: How should criminals be identified -- by name or religion or nationality or what? Two expatriates were caught in alcohol trafficking crimes when I was working in Saudi Arabia several years ago. Both were Israelis, but they had entered with British passports. Are they supposed to be classified as Jewish or Israeli or British criminals? Or are they just drug dealers? Are there some crimes committed for religious reasons or motives (even fake ones)? Yes, certainly. And yet, another question arises here: Is ‘religion’ a word that indicates only Islam? What about the major crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan that destroyed the futures of whole nations? Didn’t Bush more-or-less indicate that he received his orders from God? Let’s listen to this quote and ask if it’s a religion-based crime:
(President George W. Bush, October 2005)
We hear a lot of media buzz about “Islamic violence” and “fanatics,” and about how hundreds of millions of Muslims are implicated by one man’s declarations. But why aren’t Protestants and Americans not implicated by their president’s speech? Though Al-Qaida beheaded individuals in Iraq under name of Islam, didn’t Bush also behead the entire Iraqi nation in the name of Christianity? This is not to be read as a justification, but rather as a concern that only one party tends to get labeled as religious-terrorists or criminals, while other parties whose actions are equally bad or even worse escape such condemnation in public discourse.
The category “Japan and Islam” is relevant when we talk about events like: - Japan sent an observer to
attend the Organizations of Islamic Countries summit, But I can’t find any reason on earth how can we fit, for example, Mauritanian fish exports to Japan, as a “Japan and Islam” issue. It’s impossible to see any connection related to Islam here and it’s clear that the word Islam is “imposed” for some reason. I mean, if we go the same way on how the Iranian drug story was branded as a Japan and Islam case, then if I decided to have dinner at the most expensive sushi restaurant in Tokyo, along with a Christian and a Jewish friend, and get arrested for refusing to pay the bill, then should I find the next day news headlines saying “Japan and Islam: A Muslim and Two Foreigners Arrested in Tokyo”? In conclusion, we must disengage the words “Islam” and “Muslims” from the trade, energy, economy, fish imports/exports, actions of individuals, etc. and keep the “Japan and Islam” category related to religious practices such as the sample headlines above.
It is healthy that the debate is opening up to embrace a wider scope and hopefully lead to a consensual agreement on how Shingetsu Institute should approach and treat Islam and Muslims within the framework of its academic Japanese-Islamic mission in the Japanese context. The Dar al-Harb / Dar al-Islam duality is relevant especially as far as one talks about the golden age of “Islamic Futu-ha-t” (Islamic expansion into different parts of the world), mainly during the very first centuries (first and second centuries since the earliest Divine Revelation to Muhammad - Peace Be Upon Him) not when one raises the old / new concern of academic (in)correctness in reporting crimes perpetrated by individuals under the name of “their” religion, which is Islam in the case we are discussing here. That duality does not pertain to our current debate, nor to the very contemporary historical context that Islam and Muslims now live in. Still, it can be discussed in the context of past eras when political and socio-economic power relations were very different from today. As for Islam and Utopia, very simply there is no room for utopia in Islam. There is no such thing as “utopian Islam” or “utopian Muslims” because Islam is a “Deen” (religion) of practicality, and not of fanciful Platonism. Western metaphysics, especially in its old Greek version, has space for a utopia as envisioned by Plato especially because it is the outcome of humanly-imagined, unattainable illusions. Islam has no space for such illusions. Therefore, Abdallah Laroui was not given credit when quoted in one of the previous replies. That quote was taken out of context. Moreover, as Laroui himself once said about years ago, “I am not a Faqeeh (Islamic scholar).” Laroui was, as Said acknowledged in his book Orientalism, one of the first thinkers of a Muslim origin to have deconstructed some of the inferiorizing representations of Muslims in the so-called colonial literary tradition. In part, like Laroui, one should scientifically demistify those representations which are still fettering the Western (sub-)conscious in its conception of Others. I want it to be understood that I am not calling for the Islamization of the Shingetsu Institute or any academic mission of a comparable kind, nor am I pushing the institute to “fall victim” to Islamic logic in interpreting human phenomena (although I do advocate openness to this logic, which has more than 1,400 years tradition of solid and diversified scholarship that has generated an undeniably universal civilization). It is, however, indeed appropriate to integrate Islamic thought patterns in approaching the different human and social issues that humanities and social sciences have tackled so far from a predominantly Western secular perspective. Secularity also means scientificity, which derives its survival and development from the different sources of thought and reasoning regardless of their identity. Anyway, this is an issue that can be discussed further through appropriate means, which one hopes the Shingetsu will consider it seriously mainly as it (Shingetsu) has related itself to Islam and Muslims. To limit our debate to its initial concern, as many scholars have already suggested, Shingetsu had better not perpetuate the old biases and stereotypes inhibiting most of the Western view and approach to Islam and Muslims. It had better reconsider its approach and treatment of Islam and Muslims in Japan or elsewhere through agreeing on appropriate means for this. We do not want, and we will not let, this debate end as many that preceded it: A reply from here, and a reply from there, that lead nowhere, and eventually keep the situation as it is, preserve the status quo of things, and continue to function from within the old / new mistake of biased thinking. The label “Islam in Japan,” as such, is more comprehensive than “Muslims in Japan” which appears, at least at its surface-structure, as more oriented towards individuals not as a Deen (religion) that comprises the individual and his / her acts. It depends on how to conceptualize the first label and make it immune to bias and stereotypes. As I have suggested before, if Shingetsu is interested in working on Islam in Japan, it will be fruitful to survey and analyze the reality and conditions of Islam and Muslims in this country through approaching the Islamic organs (associations and societies) and their projects / programs. Maybe a key concept that one finds missing in Shingetsu’s treatment of Islam in Japan is “Da’wa” (literally, the call to non-Muslims to Islam as well as maintaining Muslims’ connections to their Islam). All Islamic associations and masjids in Japan have Da’wa programs, inward (for those already Muslims) and outward (for non-Muslims introducing Islam to them in the most peaceful and appropriate ways). I do not know how one can cover and study Islam and Muslims in Japan if he / she does not take such important aspects of Islamic presence in Japan into consideration. Islam in Japan does not only mean the selection, deliberate or undeliberate, of certain acts and highlighting them, while playing down, again deliberately or undeliberately, such very important and study-worthy elements as Da’wa programs with all what they include in terms of educational, cultural, socio-economic, ethical, and communicational activities, to say the least. If Shingetsu wants to limit itself to politics and economic relations between Japan and Islamic countries (in addition to education, culture, and science in their official senses), that may exonerate the institute from studying the Islamic movement in Japan. In all cases, the Institute’s approach to Islam and Muslims should transcend what taints other academic missions. It can consequently set an example, as I said before. I personally thank Shingetsu for opening this window for discussion and do really wish that it continues to play a prominent role in correcting avoidable mistakes.
Some excellent points were raised by Mr. Al-Khatib about people who use Christianity to justify their political actions but who rarely get identified for doing so. In addition to President Bush, there is an active and vocal minority in America that considers themselves Fundamentalist Christians. They pride themselves on making the vast majority of their everyday, public policy and political decisions based on their religious principles, which they believe are based on a singularly correct interpretation of the Bible. Numerous US foreign and domestic policies were shaped during the Bush Administration by Fundamentalist Christians using religion as their primary lens. Fundamentalist Christianity is a Protestant off-shoot that began in the 1920s in reaction against modernity, Humanism, and belief in scientific inquiry. It is overwhelmingly an American phenomenon and encompasses maybe 5%-10% (?) of Americans. It gives rise to intense debates in the US about the role of prayer in schools, home schooling, abortion, women’s rights, gay rights and marriage, birth control policies, global warming, and foreign policy, especially toward Israel. Why does the religious nature of some policy decisions in the US “escape such condemnation in public discourse?” I’m not sure, but it would be a great dissertation topic. With respect to what topics we as an Institute cover, I would like us to continue including trade between Japan and Muslim-majority countries / regions. While there is usually not an obvious religious nature to these interactions, they are an important part of building relationships. The same can be said about the excellent recent report on elections in the Maldives.
The debate on the category “Islam in Japan” and the drug dealers in Tokyo has produced a lot of interesting discussion. We need to find some kind of consensus that is minimally acceptable to all of us, and at this point I’d like to provide my own reactions to this debate, and proposals on how we might move forward. Since many topics were raised, I will break this up into different sections. The “Islam in Japan” Category Clearly, a revision of our categorization system is necessary, for reasons pointed out by several members. One possibility is to create a “Muslims in Japan” category, with the understanding that this reaches beyond religious matters. That may be a bit better, but I’m not sure if it really escapes all of the difficulties. We have, on several occasions, used a category called “Education in Japan” for educational issues. My proposal, therefore, is that we open up a new category called “Society in Japan” under which we will file stories touching on the activities of some Muslims in Japan that have nothing to do with religious matters per se. Stories involving non-religious crimes or civic activities would be included under this heading. Perhaps an additional “Diplomacy in Japan” category might cover activities related to the diplomats of Muslim countries inside the country as well. In sum, what we been calling “Islam in Japan” will be divided as follows: Islam in Japan: Stories touching on the religious activities of Muslims in Japan Education in Japan: Stories about Japanese activities that have some impact on Muslim relations Society in Japan: Crimes or beneficial social activities involving Muslims acting separately from religious motives Diplomacy in Japan: Events and activities of the diplomats of Muslim-majority countries The only remaining problem I see is how we categorize Islamist terrorism. In Shingetsu Newsletter No. 325 we discussed the Hiroshi Igarashi murder, which may have been an act of terrorism based on the Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa. Is this a story about religion or crime? What about the post 9.11 threat of terrorism in Japan -- which category should these stories be filed under? I’m willing to hear more from the members about this question. Drug Dealers Some members seem to question whether the story about Iranian drug dealers should ever have been covered by the Shingetsu Institute, irregardless of its categorization. I cannot do better than to direct those skeptics to the comments of Keiji Uchida, the only Japanese voice who has so far weighed in on this debate. As he rightly notes, stories about “Iranian drug dealers” (that’s how the Japanese media describes them) certainly affects the attitudes of ordinary Japanese toward at least some portions of the Muslim community in Japan. Even if we assume that all of the Iranian drug dealers are in fact Zoroastrians in their personal faith, it doesn’t change the Japanese public perceptions. That immediately makes it relevant to us. Big Tent Several members have discussed areas which they feel Shingetsu probably shouldn’t cover or else areas that we have failed to cover. My response is that we are not going to narrow our coverage, but we very much would like to broaden our coverage. “Japanese-Islamic Relations” as the Shingetsu Institute has defined it is the comprehensive relationship between the so-called “Islamic world” and Japan. This includes politics, history, economics, religion, and more. Everybody should realize that the 192 people who will directly receive this message have joined our institute for a wide variety of reasons, and have a wide variety of interests. If we stop talking about Japanese energy policy or Japan-Indonesia relations or the building of mosques in Japan, some members will have their own interests excluded and can be expected to resign their membership. Personally, I think that the fact that we have such a diverse membership participating in this project is one of its key strengths. That said, I agree with the comments of Abdelghanie Ennam that issues like Da’wa in Japan and the presentation of religious perspectives have been neglected. The reason they have been neglected is because about 90% of the materials posted on this network have been written by the little agnostic American in Kitakyushu, Michael Penn. I have cajoled and goaded all of you -- many times -- to more actively contribute Newsletters and Comments to this network. There has been progress, but it has been slow. Not only are member contributions welcome, they are very, very strongly encouraged. Ideally, I’d like to see us get to the point where I contribute perhaps 10% of the Newsletters, and my main function would become that of an editor and proofreader. That evolution depends on all of you being willing to contribute relevant materials. In the long run, if the Shingetsu Institute is going to survive for years or decades, it will need to become less dependent on me. If I walk outside today and get hit by a car, the Institute would die with me. Less dramatically, my own employment at the The University of Kitakyushu is currently scheduled to come to an end in March 2010. As of this moment, I have no idea what happens after that. Depending on the breaks, I may end up having less time and opportunity to write for this network after that point. On the other hand, there may turn out to be no problem at all. Still, it would be wise for us to think about how the Shingetsu Institute could become more of a community effort while we still have sufficient time for adjustments. Shingetsu Workshop? Mr. Ennam has called for a Shingetsu “seminar or a forum or a conference about how to define, conceptualize, and approach Islam and the emigrant Muslim community in the Japanese context.” Similar ideas have suggested to me by others in the past. If there is sufficient interest out there, we might consider the idea of holding an annual workshop in Tokyo to discuss issues related to our mission. Mr. Ennam’s idea about a discussion of the Muslim community in Japan is a reasonable theme to begin with. On the other hand, it costs me at least US$600 to make a trip to Tokyo from Kitakyushu, so I’m not much interested in showing up at an empty room after several people tell me they are going to show up and then call last minute and tell me they can’t make it. We would need someone to provide a place to meet in Tokyo and, I would say, at least a half a dozen Shingetsu Members who pledge to show up. Since I have my trip to Lebanon this month and the end of the year is usually a busy season, the earliest reasonable time to hold such a meeting would be February or March next year. If there is interest, e-mail me. If I don’t hear back from enough people, then the idea will be shelved for now.
I would suggest: 1) Widening the “Diplomacy in Japan” category, renaming it “Diplomacy and National Security in Japan.” 2) Considering a future category called “Islamic Law in Japan,” should Islamic courts be created or legislation passed providing for a differentiated legal status for Muslims (for example a right to Halal meals in schools). 3) Creating an “Islamic Banking and Finance” category if Sharia-compliant public debt and other financial instruments are issued in Japan.
What is also interesting to note is that for the last ten years the fundamentalist Christian literature on Creationism against Darwin’s evolution theory has been diligently translated and re-formatted into “Islamic” form by some circles in Turkey, and free copies are sent all over the country. I know because I get these glossy publications which weigh a ton every year at the beginning of the semester! The fundamentalist Christian example has also influenced the Creationist debate of some Islamicist groups, who have adopted the method of holding special exhibitions in shopping malls for the general public that show scenes which have dinosaurs and humans co-habiting the earth, arguing that God created nature and man simultaneously. You can visit similar exhibitions and Creationist museums in the United States in some communities. I know that there is one in Florida. It just goes to show that religiously-clad perspectives these days have their global trajectory beyond the denominational and theological boundaries of tradition.
In my opinion, the discussion about violence and religion should not avoid the main underlying principles. In other words, what are the true and real reasons for the attacks? Some have tried naively to answer this in the famous American way of “they hate us” or have given shallow answers suggesting that Islam is inherently violent, so shall we categorize those attackers as “Muslim terrorists” or “Islamic terrorism” or “terrorism by Muslims,” or shall we use the word “Islamists” instead? What is the best category? Well, I don’t think this is the real issue. These questions may lead us very far from the most enlightening track. Let’s take a practical example. Assume that Japan was under a real and true threat by some Muslims. Instead of asking whether this is Islamic terrorism or not, we have to ask, and to try to answer sincerely, why is Japan being targeted? This is more of a results-oriented discussion in the sense that we -- all of the parties involved in the presumed threat -- will be able to find some solid manner to correct the situation. Hypothetically speaking here, is it because Japan has bombarded Mecca, and Muslims are replying back? Or did Japan invade or support the invasion of Muslim land? Instead of wearing ourselves out trying to categorize the nature of the attackers, and keep reproducing the old Orientalists views, Japan should be looking at the character of its own foreign policy first (in these two hypothetical scenarios). Here I can’t stop myself from thinking: What if the Muslims in Southeast Asia had been in a better condition to resist the Japanese occupation during the Pacific War, and they had formed significant resistance groups attacking Japanese colonialists? Would that have been Islamic terrorism? Or is the difference simply that the Japanese Imperial Army didn’t have their own version of Bernard Lewis to tell them that “the problem lies within Islam.” Some will say: But there is religious-based terrorism. Well, this doesn’t really help at all in understanding the situation. I will try to take the Palestinian case and shed more light on this particular issue. Does the violence become a religious-based act in the case that the persons are religious individuals? When Al-Aqsa Brigades - Fatah (and others too like the Abu Ali Mustapha Brigades from the PFLP) get involved in Human Bombings (so-called suicide bombings) and the individuals were religious persons, is this “Islamic terrorism”? If not, then the personal beliefs of the attacker have no bearing. If yes (i.e. the religion of the attacker is the basis for the categorization) then we need to go and dig out each attacker’s personal life to see if he was committed to his own religion or not. This is clearly very absurd and draws us away from the genuine motives. Instead of examining the progress of the so-called peace process, the effectiveness of negotiations, the advance of settlements on Palestinian lands, the loss of hope in achieving liberation, etc., we would find ourselves searching only if that person prayed regularly or not! Did he fast last Ramadan or not! In his final speech, did he use verses of Quran or not! We still have more complications to come. Does violence become a religiously-based act in the case that the sponsoring organization is a religious organization, irregardless of the individual’s personal beliefs? What if Hamas performed an attack on Israeli targets with the help of international groups or arms? As an example, think of something like the attack of the Japanese Red Army at the airport in 1972? Or when Hizballah arranged with some mafia figures in Latin America to attack an apparent Israeli intelligence hub in Argentina. Is this “Islamic terrorism”? Investigating in the individuals’ personal beliefs to create a link between the political / national-oriented attacks and religions are, in my view, pointless and a waste of time. Every nation will seek to utilize its spiritual / religious / cultural inventory in the times of crises, occupations, and wars. History is replete with examples of this, is it not?
Returning again to the issue of how we might revise our categorization system for what we have previously referred to simply as “Islam in Japan,” I wanted to brief the Membership on what I have in mind based on the discussions we have had to date. This is my proposed new scheme: Islam in Japan: Stories touching on the religious activities of Muslims in Japan, including issues of Islamic law Education in Japan: Stories about Japanese activities in the field of education that have some impact on Muslim relations Society in Japan: Crimes or beneficial social activities involving Muslims acting separately from religious motives Diplomacy in Japan: Events and activities of the diplomats of Muslim-majority countries Security in Japan: Stories dealing with Japanese domestic security issues, including terrorism-related matters. Of course, we already have an “Islamic Banking” category which we have used several times in the past, so we need not make any alterations on that point. The discussions of the Members have, of course, ranged much further than the question of this categorization scheme. I think that many good points have been raised, and no doubt those discussions and disagreements will continue. We are happy to host them. However, as for the immediate problem of how to cover crime and other matters, does the scheme I have offered above meet everyone’s minimum requirements?
I think that the “Islam in Japan” category should fit all other categories in relation to activities and events based on “religious activities.” I mean that once the word “Islam” is used, then it should indicate religious activities or activities based on or provoked by the belief. If there are educational, diplomatic, social, or security activities of a religious background, then it could naturally be categorized under the “Islam in Japan” category. As a result, I see no need to have the rest of the categories to talk about Muslims. For the sake of argument, consider “Japanese Imports of Syrian Olive Oil” or “Japanese Exports of Medical Lenses to Tunisia” or “Music Concerts by a Group of Egyptian Singers in Tokyo” or “Belly Dancing Show by Arab Girls in Roppongi” or a “Meeting at Tokyo University between Deans of Universities in Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, and Iraq with their Japanese Counterparts,” etc. All of these events have nothing to do whatsoever with the religion of Islam, unless they were held on some basis in which they are. In fact, it could be very likely that some or even all of the participants are Christians, Jewish, or even atheists. So to brand such activities as indicating developments between Japan and Islam, is, I think, misleading (though with good intentions). I mean, let’s assume that a group of Lebanese and Syrian Christian priests are visiting Japan to attend a conference about International Christianity. Is this event to be filed under Japan and Islam? I would propose two categories: 1 - Japan and Islam, in the way you have put it. 2 – Japan’s relations with the Middle East, Greater Middle East, Middle East and North Africa, or Middle East and North Africa and Central Asia. It’s really difficult to denote the region, but since that I am covering the same area, I found a solution by calling it PanOrient. Note: Closely related debates later followed Shingetsu Newsletter Nos. 1193 and 1212.
|
| ©1995-2006
SHINGETSU INSTITUTE, Inc. All rights reserved. Use of this website signifies your agreement to the Terms of Use. |