Muslims attack Taliban--and more.

Due to my many years of fighting radical Islam, I often find myself with those who are equally militant in the fight against Islamists, but who also believe that Islam itself is the problem.  I stand with Dr. Daniel Pipes in saying emphatically that radical Islam is the problem and moderate Islam is the solution.  Many of those who demonize Muslims ask why there is no real push back by Muslims against Islamists; that is, that they provide ideological cover for the worst sort of behavior.  And it did seem for a while that I kept going back to the Mumbai Muslim community refusing Muslim burial to the 26/11 terrorists.  But look at what is happening right now:

• In February, Pashtuns attacked a Taliban office, completely gutting it and seizing the terror group's fire arms.
• Recently, Sindhi Muslims marched in large numbers through the streets of Karachi.  On the banner they carried at the head of the march was a picture of an Israeli flag.
• In New Delhi, Sultan Shaheen, a practicing Muslim, leads an organization which has credentialed and respected Islamic scholars writing theological arguments against interpretations of the Quran that radicals use to justify their activities.

And the fact should not be lost that these people did and are doing these things at some considerable risk.  A few members of the Pakistani military, Taliban allies, were present when the Pashtuns attacked the Taliban; and just ten days later, a Taliban leader warned Pashtun elders not to do it again because "the [Pakistani] military is with us."  The Sindhi are unique inside Pakistan with their positive and public show of support for Israel.  And my friend, Sultan Shaheen works constantly under the threat of radical retaliation; yet, he has revealed his findings at UN venues and elsewhere.

My book, What is Moderate Islam, makes it clear that success in defeating Islamists to a large extent is dependent on our ability to avoid the deadly polar positions of demonizing all Muslims or rejecting any criticism of Islam; recognizing friends and foes and knowing how to tell the difference.

What is Moderate Islam

Most reaction on the Facebook page for my new book, "What is Moderate Islam," has been positive. As I mentioned when first approached about the book, people are hungry for good information and real-life insight.  Otherwise, they are left to make sense themselves of the frequent terrorism carried out in the name of Islam.  At the same time, there also has been a string of reactions essentially saying that there is no such thing as "moderate Islam"; that all Muslims are either waging jihad or waiting in the weeds for the right time to do so.  They are wrong both ethically and factually.  As the noted scholar and activist, Dr. Daniel Pipes, has told us, it is a mistake to confuse Islam the religion with Islamism the ideology.  Pipes is also a long time supporter of my work, and he contributed a chapter to What is Moderate Islam.  In that chapter, "Smoking out Islamists with Extreme Vetting," Dr. Pipes provides us with a set of insightful questions to get beneath any veneer of moderation to the essence of a radical's beliefs.  They also help us recognize that most Muslims are not open or closet jihadis.

Those who insist that all Muslims are jihadis are no different than those who insist that Jews control the banks, all Christians are crusaders, or all Hindus are passive and weak.

Beyond being wrong, that is a strategic cul de sac; it leads to nothing productive.  Where do you go from declaring a fourth of humanity your enemy?  Do you issue blanket rulings, taking actions that sweep up the innocent with the guilty?  What do you do about children?  Are Muslim children also "eventual" jihadis so subject to the same action? Do you reject allies simply because of their faith?  Do you tell Muslim leaders that their interests are the same as those of suicide bombers?  And do we force friends to become enemies? Perhaps the impossibility of taking action that is both moral and effective is a reason why many who insist on their position do nothing other than yell.

On the other hand, those of us who have been on the front lines in the fight against radical Islamist terror know that we fight alongside of Muslims no less so than others.  In my fight to save Bengali Hindus from Islamists, I often am accompanied by Muslims who have put their own lives in jeopardy standing up for Hindus.  Similarly, no one would ever consider Robert Spencer soft on radical Islam or an appeaser.  Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and an outspoken critic of those who take claims of moderation at face value.  In his review of What is Moderate Islam, he called the book "essential reading" for "befuddled" policy makers.  He is smart enough and knowledgeable enough to know that we defeat our real enemies only when we have identified them and those who give them ideological cover; and we have distinguished friend from foe.

And that is the rationale for What is Moderate Islam.  Radical Islamists are arguably the greatest source of international instability in the 21st century.  We must defeat them and their ideological supporters.  Too often, however, all people have to choose from are two extremes:  either all Muslims are really jihadis or it's racist even to discuss a link between Islam and terror.  They need more than empty fist shaking or fear of being labeled.  What is Moderate Islam contributes to that by recognizing that both extremes are dangerous; that there is something better.