Impact of Religion and Religious Leadership on International Policies - Literature review Example

IMPACT OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS LEADERSHIP ON INTERNATIONAL POLICIES NAME INSTITUTION THE IMPACT OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS LEADERSHIP ON INTERNATIONAL POLICIES There are a host number of factors that have direct and indirect influence on the way international policies and relations are formed. Economic factors, historical factors, military factors, security factors and religious factors, all have significant influence on the way international policies are framed among nations. In the recent times, however, religion and religious leadership have proved to have more influence on international policies: one, because religion can affect every aspect of our lives (economic, social and political), and two, because religion is a volatile subject that can easily bring about regional as well as international instability if not handled properly. In this paper, I seek to analyze how religion and religious leadership has influenced the international and religion policies on the concept of human rights. In particular, this paper will focus on the differences in perception of the concept of human rights between the Western World (United States and its allies) and the Muslim World, especially the Middle East (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 56). In this paper, I will use information from United Nations High Commission for Human Rights and those from Islamic Peace Movement UK (aka Islamic Movement UK, IMUK), one of the oldest and the largest Islamic organization in the United Kingdom. Religion has proved to be an effective and important component and tool for foreign policy formulation throughout the world. Despite the relevance of religion and religious leadership as an effective foreign policy tool, the entire world seems to be lacking the wherewithal to utilize the cultural differences and understanding to pull it off. In the United States and the rest of the Western World, for instance, the focus seems to be around human rights and almost every issue touching on foreign policy is geared towards the concept of human rights. This Western obsession with the concept of human rights is the source of major cultural clash between the West and the Muslim world (Doughty, 1997, pg. 07). This is because the latter have framed their cultural behavior and hence foreign policies in terms of human duties, as opposed to human rights. This is a fundamental difference that has been the source of conflict between the West and the Muslim world for ages. Islam is not the only religion, of course, but I choose Islamic religion because of the big conflict that has existed between the Muslims and the Western world. However, these fundamental differences in the concept of human rights would be equally applicable to the other religious and cultural societies (Zunes, 2001, Pg. 13). Matters to deal with Human Rights protection are very sensitive and therefore needs to be handled with utmost care. As a result of the sensitivity of the matter, the United Nations decided to create a body that deals specifically with the issue of Human Rights violations, something that has become so common across the globe. The United Nations High Commission for Human Rights is a UN body that deals specifically with matters of Human Rights across the globe. Besides the UNHCHR, there are other affiliated bodies that work across the globe to synergize the efforts of the UNHCHR on Human Rights protection. Such bodies include the Amnesty International, the International Court of Justice, et cetera. Despite the commendable strides that have been made by the organizations, there are factions within the Arab world which still thinks that these organizations are colonial bodies meant to police them on their internal affairs and to paint them negatively to the world. As a result of this, a number of organizations have been formed in the Muslim worlds which try to oppose the efforts of the UN and its associated Human Rights Organizations. Most of these pro-Islamic organizations achieve their goals through radical means, and have therefore, been labeled terrorists organizations by the West. Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaida, Islamic Organization and the recent, Islamic State, are some of the organizations that have been formed with the view to countering the Western influence in the Middle East region (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 104.) The concept of Human Rights in the West is fundamentally different from that in the Muslim world. For example, in the West, people have the right to free speech. This basically means that one can choose to speak or not to speak, it is their inalienable right. On the contrary, the Islamic equivalent of the freedom of speech is the duty to speak. This means that if one sees an injustice, he or she has the “duty” to speak out (Doughty, 1997, pg. 04). This concept of human rights: the right to speech versus the duty to speech is one that has put the two cultures at loggerheads with one another. This has made it difficult for the Islamic community to legitimize bodies or organization formed by the West because they will always view them as agents to propagate the Western policies. Take the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the 1948, for example. The title itself contradicts the Islamic version of the Human Right, and hence it is viewed as a highly Westernized document. The architects of the document could have thought better to consider the cultural and religious differences around the world before drawing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At least the world would have been gifted with a set of treaties tied into one another, without being discredited by some cultures. For example, the West could have signed the Universal Declaration for Human Rights while the Muslim nations would have been given the Islamic version titled the Universal Declaration of Human Duties. This is the kind of treaty that would have given the Muslim world an iota of reason to trust the Western Nations, while at the same time achieving the same goal of protecting the human rights. The Islamic law is equally as complex as the Western constitutions, and therefore, the Islamic jurists should have been included in the making process of the document. Such representation in the document making process would have given the Islamic community an opportunity to contribute their cultural viewpoints; hence the feeling of marginalization we see among Muslims of today would not be the case (Doughty, 1997, pg. 07). The United Nations basically views the Islamic organizations as terrorist organizations. This is especially because of the constant reports of the level of human rights abuse perpetuated by these organizations. Similarly, these Islamic organizations view the United Nations and its agencies, not as neutral partners, but as agents of the Western World whose only mission is to spread the Western propaganda and taint the image of the Islamic regimes. For example, the biggest issue of debate in the Western world today is the concept of Islamophobia. This is a term used to describe the Western fear and stereotypes of the Islamic community. The Western World, especially the European Union and the American governments have been accused of passing laws that make it hard for Muslims to live in their countries. This notion of Islamophobia has been a knee jerk reaction to the post 9/11: the Western Society basically views every Muslim as a potential terrorist; hence Muslims are constantly marginalized (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 84.) The Islamic Peace Movement UK (IMUK) is one of the pro-Islamic organizations that have been very critical of the way the West treats Citizens of Islamic origin. In the United Kingdom, for instance, there has been back and forth discourse on the concept of Islamophobia. According to IMUK, most of the reports released by the United Nations and its associated bodies are merely meant to paint Islam as a radical religion whose main objective is to disrespect the basic human rights. The IMUK preaches peace and maintains that Islam in itself is a religion of peace, and that actions of few radical Islamic fanatics should not be used to right the narrative of the entire Islamic faith. The American foreign policy on the Middle East is a testimony to the way the American society and the West in general view the Islam World. Currently, the United States, Israel and the Islamic Republic of Iran are in a serious diplomatic row because of the same Islamophobia. The contentious issue is the Iranian Nuclear program, something which is a threat to the World peace and the stability of the Middle East, according to the West. The Israeli government has consistently, through their Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, accused the Iranian government of being the chief sponsor of terrorist groups in the region like Hamas. According to Mr. Netanyahu, it is extremely dangerous to allow a militant Islam like the Iranian regime to have a nuclear weapon because that would be a threat to the World peace. Much as some people may want to agree with Benjamin Netanyahu’s sentiments on Iranian nuclear program, a lot remains to be answered on whether Israel itself has any nuclear capability. And if they do, then it becomes clear that they have violated the Non-nuclear proliferation treaty, which they claim Iran has violated (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 76). According to the United Nations, the Middle East region is arguably the region with the worst index of human rights. The region is full of constant reminders of repression like the notorious prisons where political detainees are left to languish, censorship of newspaper and oppression of the press freedom, exiled journalists and writers, unemployment, et cetera. Everywhere in the Middle East have serious cases of human rights abuse. Elements of progress like religious tolerance, democratic rights, due processes, freedoms of assembly and expression are conspicuously missing. The trend cuts across the entire region, whether in Monarchies, theocracies, parliamentary regimes or revolutionary juntas. The records on human rights abuse are almost similar (Zunes, 2001, Pg. 13). Take Iraq, for instance. The regime of Saddam Hussein is remembered as one of the worst in the history of the country. The regime killed tortured and maimed political prisoners in their cells. Most of these killings were perpetuated by the Sunni Shi’ite divide which is increasingly becoming a force in the Middle East. In Syria, Al Assad’s regime is nothing different from Saddam Hussein’s rule. The Syrian regime has been reported to have committed some of the worst crimes against humanity in the recent times (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 56). Just a few years ago, the United Nations found out the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its own people who were protesting against the government. All these, just like in Iraq, boils down to the politics of Sunni and the Shi’ite political supremacy battle for dominance in the Middle East. In Turkey, a country that has for a long time wanted to join the Western World has history of political tortures and forceful imprisonment of political activists. In Iran, the Islamic Republic has jailed and maimed thousands of citizens who try to oppose the ruling government. In West Bank, Gaza and Lebanon, the Palestinians have been forced to live like slaves in their own land, and are constantly faced with the threat of expulsion, all because of the religious battle between the Palestinians and the Jews. The African continent is not spared in these massive human rights violations: The Berbers of North Africa are witnessing their language and cultural values being assimilated by the dominant Islamic cultures while the Copts of Egypt are constantly living in fear because of the populist regimes that view Islam and nationalism as inseparable concepts (Zunes, 2001, Pg. 17) Most of these Islamic countries have constitutions, formal legal and judicial systems. They also have provisions for democratic elections and even sometimes have people’s assembly (parliaments). However, despite having all these elements of democracy, most of what is actually practiced is in total contradiction to what is stated in their constitutions. This form of impunity, according to reports, has been the major cause of violation of human rights. Based on the United Nations report of 2014, Human Rights abuses carried between 6th July and 10th September, 2014 are so enormous that they may as well amount to war crimes or crimes against humanity (James & Joe, 2015, pg. 14). The report particularly accuses Iraq security forces and their associates for the massive human rights violations. The report was jointly produced by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) and the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights, after carrying out close to 500 interviews on the affected individuals and the individuals involved. In part, the report states: “The abuses perpetuated by the IS and associated armed groups have an apparent systematic and widespread character……..These include attacks directly targeting civilians, and civilian infrastructure, executives and other targeted killings of civilians, abductions, rape and other forms of sexual and physical violence.” (UN Report, 2014. Pg. 04) As a result of this widespread violation of human rights by the Islamic regimes, the West have adopted foreign policies aimed at intervening in any cases of human right violation that happens in the region. The governments of the United States and its allies like the European Union have constantly explored both military and non-military solutions to the problems facing the Middle East region. In the case of Syrian regime, the Western powers have sought to use economic sanctions as well as diplomatic pressures to force Al Assad into stopping his massive violation of human rights (Zunes, 2001, Pg. 11). All these reports about abuse of human rights by the Islamic regimes raise serious concern about political Islam. However, IMUK, feels that some of the information included in these reports are merely meant to drag the name of Islamic religion to the ground. Besides political killings, the Islamic States have also been reported to have other forms of human rights abuse, like the oppression of the females in the society. For instance, the females in these countries are not allowed to be independent, they cannot drive or own a driver’s license, and even worse, they are not supposed to have formal education. This is the worst form of human rights abuse, by any standard. In some places, women are not even allowed to own properties, or even to choose their husbands. The Islamic culture dictates that women are owned by the men, and hence they are not expected to make any decision on their own without consulting their men. All these barbaric cultural practices that form part of the Islamic world have influenced the foreign policies of the Western world on their engagement with the Islamic world. As a result of international pressure, Saudi Arabia has eased their restrictions on women. Today, Majority of Saudi women get formal education, own properties and even drive cars, just like men (Zunes, 2001, Pg. 16). In conclusion, religion and religious leadership is a major factor that has been influencing international policies in the recent past. The relationship between the West and the Middle East, for instance, is premised on the fact that the two civilizations have different religious and cultural values; hence their interaction must always reflect that difference. One area of cultural and religious clash between the West and the Middle East is the concept of Human Rights, with the two civilizations having completely opposite and antagonizing understanding of the concept (James & Joe, 2015, pg. 14). The West centers all their activities around human rights while the Muslim States center their activities on human duty. International bodies like United Nations High Commission for Human Rights have all failed to effectively harmonize the different perceptions of human rights by the West and the Arab world. Instead, other organizations have been started by the Arabs to counter the UNHCHR, a body viewed by most Muslim States as being pro-Western in its policies. References Doughty, S. (1997). You’re Blind to the Evils of Islam, Charles Told; Royal Warning by Human Rights Groups. Daily Mail James, P. & Joe, S. (2015). Middle East and Human Rights. Middle East Research and Information Project. Muslims for Peace, UK. www.muslimsforpeace.org. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights/ OHCHR. http://www.ohchr.org/ Peterson, J., Happiness, A., & Shireen, H. (2004). The Religious Tones of Bush’s Entry Into War in Iraq: A Choir of Manifest Destiny. UN Human Rights Council: Egypt Rights Abuses in Spotlight. http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/03/07un-human-rights-council-egypt-rights-abuses-spotlight Zunes, S. (2001). The function of rogue states in U.S. Middle East Policy. Middle East Policy. Read More

As a result of this, a number of organizations have been formed in the Muslim worlds which try to oppose the efforts of the UN and its associated Human Rights Organizations. Most of these pro-Islamic organizations achieve their goals through radical means, and have therefore, been labeled terrorists organizations by the West. Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaida, Islamic Organization and the recent, Islamic State, are some of the organizations that have been formed with the view to countering the Western influence in the Middle East region (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 104.) The concept of Human Rights in the West is fundamentally different from that in the Muslim world.

For example, in the West, people have the right to free speech. This basically means that one can choose to speak or not to speak, it is their inalienable right. On the contrary, the Islamic equivalent of the freedom of speech is the duty to speak. This means that if one sees an injustice, he or she has the “duty” to speak out (Doughty, 1997, pg. 04). This concept of human rights: the right to speech versus the duty to speech is one that has put the two cultures at loggerheads with one another.

This has made it difficult for the Islamic community to legitimize bodies or organization formed by the West because they will always view them as agents to propagate the Western policies. Take the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the 1948, for example. The title itself contradicts the Islamic version of the Human Right, and hence it is viewed as a highly Westernized document. The architects of the document could have thought better to consider the cultural and religious differences around the world before drawing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

At least the world would have been gifted with a set of treaties tied into one another, without being discredited by some cultures. For example, the West could have signed the Universal Declaration for Human Rights while the Muslim nations would have been given the Islamic version titled the Universal Declaration of Human Duties. This is the kind of treaty that would have given the Muslim world an iota of reason to trust the Western Nations, while at the same time achieving the same goal of protecting the human rights.

The Islamic law is equally as complex as the Western constitutions, and therefore, the Islamic jurists should have been included in the making process of the document. Such representation in the document making process would have given the Islamic community an opportunity to contribute their cultural viewpoints; hence the feeling of marginalization we see among Muslims of today would not be the case (Doughty, 1997, pg. 07). The United Nations basically views the Islamic organizations as terrorist organizations.

This is especially because of the constant reports of the level of human rights abuse perpetuated by these organizations. Similarly, these Islamic organizations view the United Nations and its agencies, not as neutral partners, but as agents of the Western World whose only mission is to spread the Western propaganda and taint the image of the Islamic regimes. For example, the biggest issue of debate in the Western world today is the concept of Islamophobia. This is a term used to describe the Western fear and stereotypes of the Islamic community.

The Western World, especially the European Union and the American governments have been accused of passing laws that make it hard for Muslims to live in their countries. This notion of Islamophobia has been a knee jerk reaction to the post 9/11: the Western Society basically views every Muslim as a potential terrorist; hence Muslims are constantly marginalized (Peterson et al, 2004, pg. 84.) The Islamic Peace Movement UK (IMUK) is one of the pro-Islamic organizations that have been very critical of the way the West treats Citizens of Islamic origin.

In the United Kingdom, for instance, there has been back and forth discourse on the concept of Islamophobia.

Read More