| المستخلص: |
In sociological studies, it is axiomatic that hardliner religious and identity movements do not come out of the blue. They represent a natural outcome of social, economic, cultural and political variables. Such realities coincide with challenges facing the network of inherited values and constants, leading to an “identity crisis” as well as imbalances at all the network levels. The situation is often expressed in different forms, such as the fear of the future, rejection of the present and escape to the past . The present perspective argues that the rise of the current political religious approaches shall be only viewed under self-identification. It is a defensive mechanism to counter globalization and the challenges of modernization and Westernization, which constitute a package of values and behaviours penetrating traditional communities. Thus, it is immature to deal with it in ‘security’ terms as ‘pure’ terror phenomena or ‘blind’ projects of armed violent blocs. Rather, distinction shall be made between movements of anti-Westernization, legitimate resistance to occupation and peaceful political or religious thoughts attempting to maintain heritage, creed and identity, on the one hand, and violent jihadist groups which deem the modern society completely corrupt, on the other. According to the basic hypothesis, all the forms of religious and sectarian violence and extremism feed on sociology, prior to ideology. Even though they capitalize on the religious heritage as a symbol rich of history and values, such a legacy can be dynamic and active and turn into ideology only under actual socio-political conditions. It is concluded that, in any serious, objective approach, factors of sociology precede, or at least correlate with, those of ideology in confronting the growing monster of sectarian extremism in the region. If the incubators and inputs are not dealt with before the outputs, the issue of political violence will persist and escalate. The battle is fundamentally about politics and development, but not only about security. The cultural and intellectual dimension is essential, consolidating the conceptions of democracy; plurality; accountability; citizenship values; state of the law and institutions; and social justice. In contrast, oppressive states incubate corruption, underdevelopment, extremism and all kinds of foreign intervention.
|
