Religion and Politics 7. Osama bin Laden's 1996 Declaration of War on the United States.

Osama issued two declarations of war on the United States, one in 1996 and one in 1998.  The one in 1996 was more lengthy and more filled with passion.  The one in 1998 was in the name of a collection of leaders, some of whom were religious leaders.  Both were called "fatwa," a term much misunderstood to most Americans.  A fatwa is a an advisory opinion by a religious leader explaining how to apply a principal of faith in a specific situation.  I recently saw an opinion by a local religious leader about whether an observant Muslim was allowed to work in a grocery store that sold alcohol.  That is just guidance for someone who is confused about what the faith requires of a person trying to do the right thing. 

The problem with Osama's 1996 "fatwa" was that he was not a religious leader and had no authority to hand down rulings.  And the problem with both "fatwas" is that they do not follow the proper format of a fatwa.  It typically starts with a passage from the Koran and then may quote something the Prophet Mohammed said, or one of his devoted followers, or a subsequent scholar.  It is not just a political opinion with some quotes thrown in for "proof texting."  

Still, there is a question of who has authority to speak when the recognized religious leaders are not speaking or have even taken the wrong side.  In such a case, righteous people (as Osama and his followers would considered  themselves to be) can step into the breach and take the place of those who are not doing their duty.  

This is a discussion of the 1996 fatwa.  The text is widely available on the internet for those who want to read the whole thing (which I recommend). 

The previous podcast on Background to Osama bin Laden has a list of terms.   If you have not listened to that podcast, you might want to do so.  These two are a matching pair. 

A note on how I taught this material:  My goal was to show bin Laden’s view of world conflict, not to argue with him or critique his perspectives.  When students were asked to write on this, they were asked to analyze without revealing their personal perspectives.  I told students that if their thinking after reading and analyzing a document was the same as before, then no new learning had taken place.  A serious review of a document should make you understand things you had not understood before your analysis.  (Check out the podcast on Rules of Good Studenting) 

After students had finished their paper, they were asked to add a Personal Response in which they would tell how they reacted to what they read.  That was not graded.  Most said they still did not like Osama but they understood him better.  A few felt guilty because they found several of his arguments logical.  All thought this was a very good topic to address and a very good assignment.  

Also, students were asked to write a paper comparing the Maccabees uprising (on which there is a previous podcast) with the Al Qaeda uprising.  These uprisings are 2200 years apart and yet they have many parallels in terms of the issues, the structure of the conflict, the nature of the outside force, etc.  The students considered this a challenging and creative assignment.  

We call this critical thinking.  

This podcast is rather long, but it is worth your time.