It’s All About Ethics

Michael Anbar, Ph.D.

Arab terrorism, shown in all its brutality in the 9-11 atrocity, has been used for the last hundred years as a violent tool in their assault on Western culture and its ethical values.  Most of these ethical values stem from Judaism. Terrorism has been used against the Jews in the Land of Israel, because the Jewish people symbolize for Muslims the quintessential “evils” of Western culture. The underlying cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict is not a territorial dispute or fulfillment of political aspirations. The true cause is the tremendous difference between the ethical value systems of Arabs and Jews that impedes a long-term political settlement of the conflict.

Can the Jewish culture, which lies at the foundations of Western civilization, and the Arab Muslim culture coexist within the boundaries of the ancient Jewish homeland, in the narrow strip of land between the River Jordan and the sea?  These two cultures are not just different -- they are diametrically opposed.  Let us compare on several dimensions the behavior of observant Jews and of devout Sunni Muslims currently adhering to the ethical value systems of their respective cultures. Each of these dimensions has an effect on the conflict and its potential resolution.

1. Judaism requires maintenance of the faith of the Jews, God’s chosen people -- but there is no effort to convert others. Judaism recognizes that different peoples have different deities and religions. Although traditional Jews expect that all people will eventually recognize their God as the universal god at the End of Days, already biblical Judaism gave equal legal rights to resident aliens who worship other deities.  Also the State of Israel does not discriminate any citizen because of religion or ethnicity.

Contemporary fundamental Islam, i.e., Islamism, on the other hand, does not tolerate anyone who worships another deity. Non-Muslims cannot reside, not speaking of become citizens, in countries that devoutly follow fundamental Islam, such as Saudi Arabia. While subjugated Jews and Christians may be tolerated in certain countries as “protected” residents (known as Dhimis) with limited rights, worshippers of other deities do not enjoy even that limited level of tolerance.

The Arab intolerance of non-Muslim translates into a political reality. There are those who advocate the “transfer” of Jews from Hebron as part of a peace deal with the Arabs.  But if and when Hebron would be under Arab sovereignty, as part of a political settlement, why should Jews who reside in Hebron on legally acquired property be prevented from continuing to live there, while the Arabs of Taibe, for example, should continue to be citizens of the State of Israel? Why must the Islam-driven policy of Saudi Arabia, which prohibits residency of any non-Muslims, be adopted by the proposed new Arab state west of the Jordan? 

2. For Jews, death is always a sad event. Jews typically celebrate life and try to preserve it as far as possible.  Premature Death has been viewed as God’s punishment that could be averted by doing good deeds and by repentance for wrongdoing; long life is considered God’s blessing.  After-life had no role in biblical Judaism; also in Rabbinic Judaism its conceptual role has been minimal. Jews do not dream of paradise nor do they spend time worrying about hell. The belief in the afterlife is reserved for the “end-of-days.”

In contrast, death in Islam is accepted fatalistically as a transition to bliss or to eternal suffering. If paradise is guaranteed, as it is to a shahid  (a Muslim martyr who kills infidels), death calls for celebration, as witnessed in Muslim families of dead terrorists in the “disputed territories”.  Obviously, this Islamic tenet sanctifies and glorifies violence.

3. Paradise in Islam is a place were sensual pleasures prevail – for man only!!! Women seem to be solely child-bearers and pleasure givers to men. To fulfill these functions women need no education and a quite limited legal status, as demonstrated recently by the Taliban in a model of a traditional Islamic state.

In contrast, Paradise in Judaism, to the extent of the minor role it has in Orthodox Judaism, is the abode of the pure and righteous, both man and women, with no earthly pleasures to enjoy. Women have been respected members of Jewish society since biblical times. Jewish history, unlike Arab history, tells about many resourceful and powerful women. 

Arabs consider the egalitarian status of women in Israeli society a major threat to the social structure of their community.  And this has been a major factor in their desire to get rid of all the Jews who live independently in their proximity.

4. Islam is a doctrinaire religion. One must conform to what is written in the Qur’an and accept it as the word of God; the Sharia (the 8^th Century interpretation of the ethical and legal implications of the Qur’an) is its only time-honored interpretation. Any critical analysis of Mohammad’s deeds or commandments described in the Qur’an is considered blasphemy, punishable by death (Remember Salman Rushdie).

In contrast, Judaism is non-dogmatic. Talmudic scholars did not hesitate to examine the biblical scriptures critically and interpret them in different, often contradictory ways, a process that continues up to date. Moreover, the interpretation of one scholar is not binding more than that of another.  Unlike dogmatic fundamental Sunni Islam, Judaism is essentially a dynamic religion.  As for ethics, Jewish religious law applies identical standards of treatment of Jews and non-Jews. The only definitive transgression in Judaism is the worship of other Gods; Rabbinic Judaism excommunicates such worshippers from the Jewish community, unless they repent. 

On the other hand, a Muslim who converts to another religion in a country run according to the Sharia, is punishable by death, whereas violations of precepts of Western ethics, including deceit, may be tolerated as long as the victims are infidels.

This precept has a critical political ramification:  It casts serious doubt on the validity of any treaty between Muslim Arabs and Jews. Arafat has used this tenet as an excuse to violate the Oslo accords and bragged about this.

5. Typical of the Islamistic tradition is the authoritarian image of the Prophet. Mohammad is a model of a totalitarian ruler, a model that has been emulated by Muslim despots throughout history. Also secular Islamic dictators, such as Saddam Hussein or Yassir Arafat, have emulated this model because the masses have been educated to accept despotism as ordained by God.  The tradition of totalitarian rule makes Islam incompatible with western style democracy.

In contrast, the Jewish monarchy was probably the first known restricted monarchy in human history -- Jewish kings never had absolute power, unlike the kings of the surrounding empires – Assyria, Babylon, Egypt and Persia.  Jewish constraint monarchy, which made the king accountable for his ethical behavior, starting with King David, evolved centuries before the development of classical Athenian democracy in Greece.

6. According to Jewish tradition God punished people of all walks of life who behaved unethically. Morality is ingrained in Judaism; it obligates everyone -- peasant or king alike. Consequently, Jews detest despots who typically ignore the law of the land. Moreover, Judaism expects the clergy and leadership to be models of unblemished ethical behavior.

In contrast, according to the Qur’an, Mohammad seems to have violated numerous ethical rules of his society -- actually rules of any civilized society – violating treaties, deceit, elimination of political enemies, indiscriminate murders and cruel torture of infidels. Since Mohammad has been the model for devout Muslim leaders, his behavior has been used as a license for similar behavior up to date.  Islamic tradition of hostility and discrimination toward non-Muslims, implies that a Western style egalitarian democracy, envisioned by President Bush, is incompatible with traditional Islam.

7. Islamists believe that Muslims are superior to non-believers. Islam’s concept of supermen, i.e., member of the Islamic Umma, is inherent in its culture.   This concept reappeared centuries later as a fundamental premise of the Nazi ideology.  For the Nazis the criterion of elitism was the imaginary supremacy of the Germanic super-race, while for Muslims it is the belief in the supremacy of believers in Allah and Mohammad, his prophet.  The corollary of this Islamic ideology is despise of all non-Muslim people.

In contrast, Jews believe that the Jewish people were chosen by God to serve him not because Jews are superior to other peoples. Judaism accepts the superiority of other people in any respect, except for the special tie between Jews and their God.

This theological difference between the two religions is quite profound and has intrinsic political ramifications. The anti-Semitic expressions, which have appeared appear in the media all over the Islamic world, e.g., the notorious “Protocols” and Judeophobic cartoons, are extremely similar to the Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda. This is not coincidental – it shows the similarity between these two supremacist ideologies.

8. Islamic conviction that Islam supercedes all other religions has resulted in the Muslim tradition of establishing their places of worship on the very sites used by other religions, presumably to symbolize that Islam replaces all other religions. This tenet of Islam has been manifested in the conversion of the pagan Kaaba in Mecca into the center of Islamic worship. This has been followed by building a mosque on the site of the Jewish ancient Temple in Jerusalem, converting the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople into a mosque, and constructing mosques on the site of the Visigoth church in Cordoba and on the ruins of tens of Buddhist shrines in India that were destroyed by the Islamic invaders, among many others. This mode of Islamic behavior has not changed over the centuries.  Just a year ago, Muslim Arabs converted the sacred Jewish site of Joseph’s Tomb in Shkhem (Nablus) into a mosque, following a brutal and bloody takeover. 

This Muslim behavior is absolutely contrary to the Jewish tradition according to which each of the three most holy sites in Judaism –the Temple in Jerusalem, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and the Tomb of Joseph in Shkhem -- were purchased from their previous non-Jewish owners, paying their full value with “hard cash”.  This tradition is meaningful – it shows the legality of the exclusive ownership of these sacred sites that were acquired ethically, not by conquest!  Again, this demonstrates the profound difference in basic ethical values between Jewish and Islamic cultures.

It is hard to overestimate the political connotation of this difference between Jewish and Muslim points of view.  The question of jurisdiction over the Temple Mount has been a major bone of contention between Arabs and Jews.  This is a case where Jewish tolerance for another religion is in direct conflict with its rightful national possession.

9. The end goal of Jewish culture is to improve the world, whereas the goal of fundamental Islam is to rule the world, converting by force all of humanity to Islam.  Each of these cultures has been optimized to achieve their respective goal: The Muslim aggressive militaristic culture requires blind, absolute obedience of the troops to their leader, who emulates Mohammad, the warrior conqueror. The Jewish non-doctrinaire culture encourages freethinking and creativity, which explains the disproportionately large contribution of Jews to all aspects of Western culture. 

To optimize the chances of victorious conquest Muslims must be fatalistic --dreaming of a big reward after death. To optimize creativity Jews must be optimistic -- looking for rewards in their lifetime.  Jewish optimism is the secret of their success in any community they live in; it explains the meteoric rise of the State of Israel from a community of impoverished refugees residing in a land lacking any significant natural resources to one of the technologically and economically most advanced countries in the world. On the other hand, Islamic fatalism can explain the retarded status of practically all Islamic countries.

10. A Jewish martyr is one who dies to preserve and defend his belief in Judaism.  Christian martyrdom is similar to its Jewish origins; the Jewish martyrs during the reign of Antioch IV, who outlawed Jewish religious practice leading to the Maccabean revolt, have been used as models in Christianity.

In contract, a Muslim martyr is one who dies killing infidels, i.e., non-believers in Islam or apostates. For Muslims killing of infidels is not a crime – it is a tenet of traditional Islam. Islamists have recently used this tenet as justification of the numerous terrorist atrocities against Jews, Americans and others, including the 9/11 mass-murder.

Peace among nations is an ideal in Jewish ethics. Conquering all non-Muslim nations and converting them to Islam is the Islamic ideal.

Can people with such disparate cultures, with such dissimilar aspirations, with such incongruent ethical value systems, live in peace and harmony on a small piece of land west of the River Jordan?  The answer is NO.  While we witness assimilation in the Land of Israel where some Muslim Arabs adopt the Western ethics, and there is a similar pattern among Muslims in Western countries, there is today an ominous upsurge of fundamental Islam sponsored by the powerful Wahabists of Saudia. 

The PLO that started as a secular movement, emulating Communist “national liberation” revolutionaries, has dramatically changed under the influence of fundamentalist Islam and Saudi Wahabists funding. Recruiting, training, equipping and then glorifying suicidal terrorists is just one manifestations of this fundamental change. Far more ominous is the PLO-sponsored education of young children to hate Jews, Americans and whatever they stand for, mass-producing a generation of Islamist killers.  The PLO has converted the territories under its control since the Oslo agreement into a militant Wahabist political entity bound to spread Islamic domination by violence. This is widely evident in the weekly vitriolic sermons in the mosques of Gaza, Nablus and Ramallah. The Israeli leadership must have noticed this ideological change already twenty-five years ago when Arafat’s henchmen were massacring Christian Arabs in Lebanon, but they did not realize its significance.  This shortsightedness has lead to the Oslo debacle.

We are now at a crossroad on the “Roadmap to Peace;” which direction should we  take? President Bush’s vision of a new Arab democracy west of the River Jordan implies a secular Western-like democracy with full equality and personal freedom of every citizen, not a theocratic single-party “democracy” like that in Iran. He definitely does not have in mind a militant despotic “democracy” following the Iraqi or Libyan models. The first station on “the road to peace” must be, therefore, the de-Wahabization of the Arab population involved, similar to the de-Nazification of the Germans after WWII. 

De-Wahabization will not be as easy as de-Nazification; Hitler had less than 10 years to build up his Hitler-Jugend in the face of a tacit opposition of the German Church, whereas Arafat had more time to build up his hate brigades of youngsters with full cooperation of the Muslim clergy. Moreover, Hitler’s nationalism stayed within most of the ethical boundaries of Western culture – to murder Jews, Hitler had to dehumanize them first and then he kept the Auschwitz atrocities a secret.  Arafat and his fanatic followers have no such ethical constraints -- Jews and other infidels are to be killed because Islam mandates this, and the Arabs brag gleefully about their inhumane “successes”.  The very last thing the West needs at this point in time is the establishment of another Wahabist state west of the River Jordan with unmitigated Islamic ethical values, bound on religion-driven militancy.  It will be a source of mortal danger not only for Israel but also for the rest of the world. President Bush is certainly aware of this.

To be accepted by Israel and by the West as citizens of a newly established Arab state, west of the River Jordan, the Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza must first adopt certain basic ethics of Western culture. These must include: 1. Acceptance of all people of other religions and cultures as equals.  2. A high regard for any human life.  3. Unmitigated personal freedom of all citizens in the proposed Arab state. Unconditional abandonment of pan-Arab Islamic Wahabist ideology and a willful appropriate re-education of the Arab population involved, as long as this may take, must precede any negotiations about territorial or outstanding political issues between Arabs and Jews.