Speaker finds “unholy alliance” in politics, religion

John Esposito believes the influence of fundamentalist Christianity in the Bush administration… John Esposito believes the influence of fundamentalist Christianity in the Bush administration is a definite press-relations problem when dealing with the Arab world, and when attempting to conduct an ongoing, global war on terror.

Especially, he argues, when members of the administration and affiliates of the religious right use the word “crusade.”

“There is an unholy alliance in this country between the Christian and Zionist Right, and the neo-conservatives in power,” charged Esposito, one of the foremost contemporary American scholars of Islam, during his Monday visit to Pitt.

“Their ideologies may be different in some respects,” he added, “but their ultimate agenda is similar”.

Esposito carved a niche for himself during the 1970s, studying Islamic culture and, more specifically, the rise of political Islamic movements, including the Iranian revolution in 1979.

“I have often said,” he joked, “that I have the Ayatollah Khomeini to thank for my career.”

Since Sept. 11, 2001, Esposito has emerged as an outspoken critic of President George W. Bush’s foreign and domestic policies. A professor at Georgetown University, Esposito has written more than 25 books on the subject of Islam. He also served as a foreign affairs analyst for the State Department under President Clinton.

In the packed Lower Lounge of the William Pitt Union, Esposito offered an intense historical account beginning with the revolution in Iran. He traced the timeline from American support for the war of the Islamic fighters — including Osama Bin Laden — against the Soviets in Afghanistan throughout the 1980s, to the effect of globalized communication on the Islamic world in recent years.

“Muslims everywhere were able to watch Yasser Arafat on CNN, shouting ‘Martyrdom, Martyrdom, Martyrdom’ into his cell phone in the ruins of his besieged Ramallah compound at the height of Israeli incursions to the West Bank in 2002,” Esposito said. He argued that the ability of many to watch such events has had a huge rallying effect on the global community of Muslims.

“American support for repressive regimes around the world, like military and financial aid to Israel, has key resonance throughout the Muslim world,” he added.

After Sept. 11, 2001, many in the Islamic community felt a degree of sympathy towards the United States, Esposito pointed out. But many feared that “America had imperial aspirations” as it invaded Afghanistan and proceeded to open a second front in Iraq, he added.

According to Esposito, there is apprehension among Muslims that America is attempting to “re-draw the map of the Middle East for its own national interest.”

Esposito posed the question of how the authoritarian oil states in the Middle East, which he said, are supported by the United States, get away with not holding democratic elections.

“They use the label of ‘extremists’ or ‘security threat’ to cut off any dissidence,” Esposito said.

In the United States, Esposito and his Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, at Georgetown University, have been brought before the U.S. House of Representatives. Opponents said Esposito was an “apologist for militant Islam,” and that he endorses “terrorist activities.” The House debated whether international studies programs like his, and those in other universities around the country, are ideologically biased, and “should be regulated.”

Pitt’s University Center for International Studies contains five component centers designated by the Federal Government as national resource centers.

“The ideals and principles upon which this country was founded should not be compromised by this war on terror,” Esposito said.

“The Bill of Rights should not be abridged,” he said. “We cannot arrive at a situation where torture is deemed OK, and where to be a patriot is not to dissent. Ultimately, we do not want to get to the point where we look an awful lot like our own enemies”.