I'm an internet auteur

I have been published!....on the net...again. I'll take all the publishing I can get, thank you. I'm reposting the article here, and you are all (all 3 of you) welcome to check out the original posting. I've been working on this play with Dr. Ahmed since last fall and I was commissioned to write a little press release about it.

"Those of us who traverse across this mortal world have often pondered the properties of time and history. It is as though we are drifting upon the still surface of a lake, and as the rain falls, creating ripples in the water, it carries us to edge, sometimes spilling over into land. No event may be isolated from the other, and even what seems like the tiniest wave on the other side of the lake may become something greater. The trial of a Mughal prince cannot be separated from the future of an Islamic civilization on the Indian sub-continent, and neither may it be separated from the greater global history.
The story of Dara Shikoh is one that has occurred across many different nations in many different eras, it is the story of an idea that seeks the destruction of all opposing ideas, played out in the familial struggle between two brothers. In seventeenth century India we find Prince Dara Shikoh, a humble mystic, promoting peace amongst the various faith traditions in the empire and his brother Aurangzeb who is troubled both by the apparent deviation from Islam and the political consequences of empowering these other faith traditions. Dara is swept into the world of political intrigue and religious extremism and put on trial for apostasy. With him goes the soul of his efforts for peace.
Akbar Ahmed’s latest play, The Trial of Dara Shikoh, allows the viewer to watch this moment in history unfold and feel the anticipation and anxiety of the outcome as though it were happening for the first time. We follow Dara’s plight, his struggle to make others understand. We try to understand Aurangzeb, who is both villain and hero, initiating and allowing violence, but yet dedicated to a people who he believes are the only ones entitled to charity, finding himself all alone in the final scenes. Whose legacy will survive? Who has the better claim to define an empire? A civilization? A religion?
Here is where we see just how much one wave upon the lake is like another, for we are again in an era that challenges us to choose who will define Islam for the modern world. This is not a challenge that non-Muslims can ignore, for we have all grown to be so connected to each other by social, political, and economic ties that grow stronger everyday. The legacy of the struggle between Prince Dara and Aurangzeb is one with universal implications. When violence becomes the means by which rules are made, can the peaceful survive?
The Trial of Dara Shikoh, a play by Akbar Ahmed and directed by Manjula Kumar, is described by Stanley Wolpert of the University of California at Los Angeles as “not only a fascinating drama, but a most important, highly instructive study of the major forces within Islam that continue to reflect the fatal struggle between Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb that grip our modern world and may help to decide our global future”."

Maybe its a bit hokey, but whatevs. Its mine.

The play will be performed on March 21 at 7pm and March 22 at 4pm in the Abramson Recital Hall in the Katzen Arts Center at American University. Ticket information is available on the Katzen Arts Center website.

Our tribe feels slightly antagonistic towards your tribe

This is a review of a review which reviews other works. That's right kids, I'm opening up an international relations/anthropological working paper wormhole.

Over at the offices of Dr. Ahmed, two of my colleagues worked very hard to create a fantastic working paper that responds to Stanley Kurtz's review of Dr. Ahmed's works. Frankie and Hailey really have written a great paper that you may download here, entitled Good Anthropology, Bad Islam?..

These are a few of my favorite excerpts:

"The next president of the United States will have to take urgent steps to repair this kind of damage. They can start by shifting a great deal of American aid from military expenditures, which only exacerbates the problem, to development projects and educational aid. For an example take Pakistan, which has received over $10 billion from the United States to fight the war on terrorism, which it has used to buy tanks, planes, and helicopter gunships used to subjugate tribes like the Wazir and Mahsud without success. If half that money, lets say, were put toward educational programs, especially curriculums that stressed the place of knowledge, or ilm, in Islam and provided an alternative to narrow minded madrassas, which are often the only choice for parents wanting to give their children an education, Muslims would applaud America. This would be tangible proof, in addition to symbolic efforts, that Americans do not hate Islam and wish to engage with its followers. This may just counter the harmful effects of the global Western media, or push coverage in a more positive direction and in turn influence Muslim media, which tends to mirror, in reverse, Western media."

"There exists a great unsatisfied demand for dialogue. American diplomats
need to be in the markets, mosques, and madrassas of Islamic countries making connections with political and religious leaders, showing respect for local cultures, and lending an empathetic ear to Muslim grievances. The United States has been unable to meet that demand, or, perhaps even worse, realize that it even exists."

"What we found when we viewed America from the outside was a country that was in
danger of losing sight of the ideals that made it great in the first place. For many of the Muslims we spoke to the perception they had once had of a open, free America with democracy, human rights, and the best medicine and education in the world had been transformed into a dark fortress that builds walls around itself, tortures people, incarcerates people indefinitely without trial, spies on its citizens, and launches one disastrous war after another. These Muslims were angry about many problems in their societies, but they were also angry this horrific vision of America had replaced their prior belief that America was a beacon of hope and democracy to be emulated in a dangerous world. Our conclusions in Journey into Islam are focused on ways to improve US relations toward the Muslim world but are also prescriptions for America to rediscover its own ideals, which will actually greatly assist its ability to deal with the world of Islam."

Mr. Kurtz, look out. Dr. Ahmed has got a whole team of young kids ready to write all sorts of reaction papers that politely disagree with you and debunk your ideas. We're like...nerdpunks, intellectually inquisitive and post modernly rebellious, but without the safety pin piercings. Well, there was that one time when I didn't feel like shelling out the money for a nose ring, but that didn't really work out so well. Point is, my colleagues are hardcore awesome. Great job guys!

Blasphemy, blas-pher-you, blas for everybody!

This week I got to write a reaction paper to a fascinating book entitled When Religion Becomes Evil by Charles Kimball for my Religion and Peacebuilding class. I thought I'd share a little bit of that essay with you folks.

Looking at my own religious community, the American Christians, I have to say yes, religion is becoming evil. When I look at other communities, I want to say no, because I can easily point non-religious motivations that are creating conflicts but expressing themselves in religious language. It’s a bit of a double standard, but I have a tendency to harshly criticize what I am closest to. The problem isn’t within the nature of Christianity; its how societies have allowed religious expression to become so poisonous to the general public. Lucky for me, Kimball is a Baptist minister, and he applies the warning signs mainly to his own faith, as is to be expected.

Of the five warning signs that Kimball lists (1. Absolute truth Claims, 2. Blind Obedience, 3. Establishing the Ideal Time, 4. The End Justifies Any Means, and 5. Declaring Holy War), absolute truth claims are the most dangerous if only because it is the first step. In middle school and high school (such a loooong time ago, I know), I was a very active evangelical Christian, for many different reasons I won't go into.

I have since removed the evangelical label from my religious identification, not because I experienced any destructive blow to my faith in Christianity, but because I was becoming better friends with non-Christians and I felt that always looking at people as potential converts or even just believing that these people were on “the outside” was wrong and dehumanizing. Even just thinking that my non-Christian friends would not be allowed into heaven was a truly scary thought and it ceased to be my motivation to change them but rather to change myself. I even have a refrigerator magnet that sums up most of feelings towards contemporary American Christianity, “Please Jesus, save me from Your followers.”

Kimball uses a familiar phrase to highlight the problems of absolute truth claims: “Christianity isn’t a religion, it’s a relationship”. I've heard that one a lot, and even used it quite a few times. I don’t really agree with that statement anymore in so much as I believe Christianity is a religion and a relationship, as are most other faiths. However, I’ve always thought it was a clever way to exempt Christianity from the debates over secularism and the general evils of religion that were usually posed by ardent atheists.

I agree with Kimball that the phrase also hints at a much deeper issue, the complete nullification of any other religion’s right to assert its own validity. In particular, I liked his quote, “I am convinced that it is possible to be a person of faith with integrity—a Christian, a Hindu, a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist—and at the same time recognize that one’s own experience of God does not exhaust all possibilities” (9). I think it is fair for a religion to assert it has the best understanding of truth, as any company would describe their product as the best version of its kind in the market, but not the only way of understanding truth.

Be aware that I am not claiming the a belief in the existence of an absolute truth is dangerous, it is just the way people have chosen to express their exclusive access to this truth.

What do you guys think about absolute truth claims? Do you think you have it right and everyone else has got it wrong? Or is everyone wrong, and that's okay?

The title of this post is inspired by Eddie Izzard's bit about Pope-Man. Could be a whole series...with a lot of complaints. I swear I quote that man almost as much as Dr. Ahmed. Almost.

Sycophantism and Waziristan Part III

Fresh on the heels of Robert Gates' statement that the US was ready to send troops into Waziristan, Dr. Ahmed talks about the dangers of favoring a military option in Waziristan, especially in light of the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan in Part III of his interview with The Globalist.

"I would say that the United States should be very cautious — and should send its finest diplomats to have good relations with the tribal chiefs, through jirgas. They should meet them, show them respect, listen to them.


The United States needs to realize that it cannot make the mistake, whatever it does, of sending in troops, because that will do two things: It will consolidate all the tribes against the United States — and also push even those wavering into the local Taliban camp. The local Taliban are already dominating the tribal areas — and now, they are spilling into the settled districts of Pakistan.


Action in the tribal areas will also inflame all of Pakistan. Even those who are seen to be pro-American, like President Musharraf, have warned against any U.S. military action in Pakistan."

Sycophantism and Waziristan "Part Deux"

Soon to come on this blog, more discussion of religion and destruction as I am writing a short paper about it this week. It should be fun. In the meantime, enjoy more discussion of my awesome professor.

Here's a quote from Dr. Ahmed's interview with The Globalist Part II where he answers a question about Waziristan and modernity. The answer I think is applicable to many societies who have said they have no wish to modernize.

"However the people of Waziristan living in Karachi are as modern as you and me. But back home in their own region, they preserve their own custom and tradition. It is a conscious choice—and has nothing to do with “barbarians living in caves.” They opted for preserving their identity and a culture. They said this preserves our freedom. That’s what they treasured above all. They said, “We have seen what you have done to Pakistan, what modernization means to Pakistan — corrupt police, corrupt revenue officials, corrupt politicians.’ So they said, ‘We have seen all this. What are you going to give us that is different? Why do you want to modernize us? Leave us alone.’"

Also described in the article is how the war on terror has pushed different governments into becoming military states leaving huge vacuums of power open to radicals like the Taliban to step in and "restore" a sense of law and order that is governed by at the very least civilians, if not with the complete blessings of the entire society.

Dr. Ahmed goes on to say that there is indeed a way to bring stability back to Waziristan, but its a tricky one that involves engaging a tribal system rather than abolishing it:

"...The Americans, who seem to be on the war path if newspaper reports are to be taken seriously, have no idea of this type of [tribal] administration. It is a colonial administration and Americans are not a very colonial people. The Americans are used to a mayor who is elected for a fixed period.

In Waziristan, when I was the political agent, I was accountable to no one, except for my own reputation. That is not a very acceptable concept in the West. A 21st century solution has therefore to be found which is informed by the past in which diplomacy and a shrewd understanding of the nature of tribal society often averted death and destruction while meeting the objective at hand."

Sycophantism and Waziristan

Yes it is time I start blabbering on about my awesome professor again.

Dr. Ahmed, the professor I am privileged to work for along with some other fantastic research assistants, has just been featured in an article for The Globalist talking about US covert action in Waziristan, relating a bit to yesterday's post about Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Waziristan is a province in NW Pakistan and is the favorite location for presumed bin Laden hide outs it appears. According to the BBC, the Pakistani government has been aggressively pursuing Al Qaeda and Taliban activists and looking for tribal allies to push Al Qaeda and the Taliban out.

In the past, Waziristan cooperated with the Americans in pushing the Soviets out of the region, and had a favorable view of Americans. But after the war was won, and the Americans had left, something began to change. Dr. Ahmed describes:

"Initially, Americans had a good reputation. After all, it was because of the Americans, especially the CIA, that the Afghans won the war in Afghanistan. The CIA, working with the Pakistani intelligence, was able to provide weapons to the Afghans and especially the “Stingers” to shoot down the Soviet helicopters. Afghans remember that Ronald Reagan had called them ‘freedom fighters.’

But not long afterwards, Afghans looked at their land and said, ‘My god, look at the devastation, we are destroyed, our homes are destroyed. One-fourth of our people have lost a limb or a leg because of the Soviet’s brutalities. Our homes have been uprooted; there is starvation in parts of Afghanistan.’ And they thought, ‘our American friends will help us.’

But the Americans just walked away. That was the fatal error. When the United States walked away they left a vacuum. The warlords came back, along with local rivalries — and this time the king of Afghanistan was no longer there to act as a unifying force. It was just an implosion of society. In that vacuum, we saw the emergence of the Taliban. In that anarchy and chaos, emerged Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda and the stage was set for 9/11."

This isn't Star Wars

Here's a video of Dr. Ahmed on This Is America with Dennis Wholey. My favorite bit is when Dr. Ahmed describes the circumstances in which modern generations of Muslims are growing up in dictatorships and impoverished and how that is what fuels their anger, not any over simplified romantic ideas of good vs. evil and "they" hate us for our freedom.