By Joseph Deaux
15 March 2008 [MEDIAGLOBAL]: “Religious extremism has been the instigator of wars, and religion has played a role in hurting people in various ways,” Dr. David Little, Professor at the Harvard Divinity School, told a panel of experts who gathered at the United Nations Secretariat last week to discuss the global effects of religious extremism.
The panel included Dr. David Steele, Reconciliation Facilitator with the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington; Dr. Gisela Webb, Associate Director of the Seton Hall University Honors Program; and Dr. Qamar-ul Huda, of the Religion and Peacemaking Program at the United States Institute of Peace. The discussion was sponsored by the Whitehead School of Diplomacy and International Relations at Seton Hall University.
Since 1995, the link between terrorist actions and religious ideologies has come under intense scrutiny.
Steele cited the role of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the Balkans as an example of religious extremism involved in widespread conflict. The church was said to have had ties to Slobodan Milošević, the warlord accused of committing crimes against humanity during the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s.
Little remarked that the focus on extremism had to do with the degree to which extremists were willing to resort to violence.
The panelists argued that many religious groups have been blamed for violence but do not directly contribute to violent causes until their backs are against the wall.
Huda indicated that a group of respected Islamic scholars claimed that extremist groups such as the Taliban had every right to stand up and fight for their existence, because their struggle was in defense of their property and values.
Often, a group’s identities and values are at stake, forcing them to take a survival-of-the-fittest stance.
Webb argued that one must contemplate the point at which extremists feel that their options have been exhausted and turn to force.
Little reminded the panel that most religions are fundamentally anti-violent, and many of the texts used by religious extremists to promote or justify bloodshed could be interpreted in other ways.
All religions have checks and balances to dissuade extremist actions, and scholars within those traditions often try to quell violent crusades.
Religious convictions run especially strong in conflict areas, such as Sudan, Somalia and Afghanistan. Some religious leaders use their influence to promote peace, while others channel religion to fuel the fighting.
Little told MediaGlobal that between 1973 and 1983 extremist leaders in Sudan brought about 10 years of peace to the war-torn nation. But in 1983 conflict resumed and the Second Sudanese Civil War began.
Religious-driven conflicts in Sudan and Nigeria were cited as a major obstacle to development.
Webb explained to MediaGlobal that radical groups in Solo, Indonesia, were influential in integrating Muslims from the Middle East. Traditional Muslims in Solo knew that dialogue with immigrant Muslims was extremely important, and the gesture was considered selfless. “The results were very positive,” Webb added.
“Despite the understandable and necessary focus on the strife caused by extremism of religions and ideologies, it is encouraging to look at the work of organizations and institutions determined to cooperate and educate on the pitfalls of extremism,” she said.
Steele added, “The focal question, therefore, is not whether religion should be employed as an ally of diplomacy, but when, where and how.”
“Religious education, in particular, is an important source for civilization, cultural and religious dialogue that can engage communities and prevent polarization,” concluded Huda.