Loosely Interpreted Arabic Terms Can Promote Enemy Ideology
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

BAGHDAD, June 22, 2006 - The pen is mightier than the sword, and sometimes 
in the war of words we unwittingly give the advantage to the enemy.

In dealing with Islamic extremists, the West may be giving them the
advantage due to cultural ignorance, maintain Dr. Douglas E. Streusand and
Army Lt. Col. Harry D. Tunnell IV. The men work at the National Defense
University at Fort Lesley J. McNair in Washington, D.C.

The two believe the right words can help fight the global war on terror.
"American leaders misuse language to such a degree that they unintentionally 
wind up promoting the ideology of the groups the United States is fighting," 
the men wrote in an article titled "Choosing Words Carefully: Language to Help
Fight Islamic Terrorism."

A case in point is the term "jihadist." Many leaders use the term jihadist 
or jihadi as a synonym for Islamic extremist. Jihad has been commonly adapted 
in English as meaning "holy war." But to Muslims it means much
more. In their 
article, Steusand and Tunnell said in Arabic - the language of the Koran - 
jihad "literally means striving and generally occurs as part of the expression
'jihad fi sabil illah,' striving in the path of God."

This is a good thing for all Muslims. "Calling our enemies jihadis and their
movement a global jihad thus indicates that we recognize their doctrines and 
actions as being in the path of God and, for Muslims, legitimate," they wrote.
By countering jihadis, the West and moderate Muslims are enemies of true Islam.

The men asked Muslim scholars what the correct term for Islamic extremists 
would be and they came up with "hirabah." This word specifically refers to 
those engaged in sinful warfare, warfare contrary to Islamic law. "We should 
describe the Islamic totalitarian movement as the global hirabah, not the 
global jihad," they wrote.

Another word constantly misused in the West is mujahdeen. Again, in American
dictionaries this word refers to a holy warrior - again a good thing. So 
calling an al Qaeda terrorist a mujahid legitimizes him.

The correct term for these killers is "mufsidun," Streusand and
Tunnell say.
This refers to an evil or corrupt person. "There is no moral ambiguity and 
the specific denotation of corruption carries enormous weight in most of the 
Islamic world," they wrote.

People can apply other words instead. "Fitna/fattan: fitna literally means
temptation or trial, but has come to refer to discord and strife among 
Muslims; a fattan is a tempter or subversive," they wrote. "Applying these 
terms to our enemies and their works condemns their current activities as 
divisive and harmful."

The men also want officials to stop using the term "caliphate" as the goal 
of al Qaeda and associated groups. The Caliphate came to refer to the 
successors of the Prophet Mohammed as the political leaders of the Muslim 
community. "Sunni Muslims traditionally regard the era of the first four 
caliphs (A.D. 632-661) as an era of just rule," the men wrote. "Accepting 
our enemies' description of their goal as the restoration of a historical
caliphate again validates an aspect of their ideology."

The men point out that an al Qaeda caliphate would not mean the establishment 
of just rule, but rather a global totalitarian state where women would be 
treated as chattel, music banned and any kind of difference severely punished.
"Anyone who needs a preview of how such a state would act merely has to review
the conduct of the Taliban in Afghanistan before Sept. 11, 2001," they wrote.

The correct term for the al Qaeda goal is global totalitarian state -
something no one in the world wants.

Finally, the men urge Westerners to translate Allah into God. Using Allah
to refer to God would be like using Jehovah to refer to a Hebrew God. In
fact, Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the God of Abraham. Using
different names exaggerates the divisions among the religions, the authors
say.

The men have launched an education effort. "Our work is an attempt to
educate the interagency community about the challenges of communication
with Islamic audiences," they wrote in answer to written questions.
"Our particular effort 
is in its infancy, but is showing some level of success."

Scholars at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College use the essay
in class, and the Marines are using an earlier version of the essay as part
of their lessons-learned Web site. The final version of the essay is on the
National Defense University's Center for Strategic Communications Web site.


                              -==-

Source: "Defense Link"
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2006/20060622_5489.html


Cheers, Steve..

---