Words can be weapons. Which is why Lt. Gen William G.
“Jerry” Boykin’s comments are so troubling.
Boykin, who is one of the key figures in the war on terrorism,
has repeatedly made questionable comments when discussing the
various conflicts in which the United States is involved in the
Middle East. Boykin’s comments should be a source of
considerable concern because they could further aggravate the
tension between the United States and certain Muslim groups.
Religious intolerance and bigotry would be reinforced through a
perpetuation of grossly inappropriate stereotypes.
Boykin has made inflammatory statements concerning Islam and
Muslims, and links his personal views to U.S. actions in the Middle
East. He once argued that the United States was attacked
“because we are a Christian nation “¦ and the enemy is a
guy named Satan.” Boykin has also argued that his successes
in battle against adversaries were because “I knew my God was
bigger than his.” Boykin also seems to believe the U.S.
military is the “army of God,” and that President
George W. Bush was divinely ordained to be leader of the United
States.
Boykin has refused to fully renounce these statements. And, by
merely stating that fundamentalist Muslims are not representative
of Islam, he fails to adequately distance himself from using
religious comments to frame the war on terrorism.
Considering Boykin’s position, this is a major concern.
Boykin is the deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence,
and is a major player in the hunt for figures such as Saddam
Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Boykin has also been involved in
conflicts with predominantly Muslim countries before, battling
Somali warlords and attempting to rescue American hostages from
Iran. Having an official in such a high position holding such
repugnant beliefs is dangerous and counterproductive. It is for
this reason that various religious groups such as the Interfaith
Alliance have rightfully pushed for Boykin to be reprimanded and
possibly removed.
One of the most significant reasons why Boykin’s comments
are so harmful is that they will turn disputes between the United
States and Muslims into a religious war ““ exactly the
opposite of what should be happening. Osama bin Laden and his ilk
point to American involvement in Iraq, backing of despised leaders,
and U.S. support for Israel as proof that Americans are waging a
war against Islam. Whether one agrees with this interpretation or
not, it is incredibly important to recognize that this is how the
current situation is viewed by the fundamentalists with whom the
United States must now cope.
By using religious rhetoric and by painting the struggle as a
fight between Christianity and Islam, Boykin plays into the hands
of fundamentalists on both sides. On one hand, he validates the
feelings of those Muslims who believe the United States is intent
on waging war on Islam ““ that the United States has no regard
for the people of the Middle East and no concern regarding the
impact we have on their lives. On the other hand, he adds fuel to
the American propaganda fire, painting Muslims as the “evil
other.” This kind of thinking will only lead to perpetual
violence and conflict, a true “clash of civilizations”
resulting in further polarization between the two cultures.
Certainly, the violence between the United States and certain
Muslims is driven by issues far beyond religious fundamentalism,
but the feeling that one religious group is under attack by another
is clearly a cause of strife, and people on both sides must attempt
to diffuse such sentiment.
For example, since the Sept. 11 attacks, there has been a sharp
rise in hate crimes against Arabs, Muslims and people who are
mistaken for members of these ethnic and religious groups. Even at
UCLA, we have had incidents of hate, with Muslim prayer rugs being
defaced at the interfaith chapel at the UCLA Medical Center. After
the Sept. 11 attacks, Muslim women throughout the United States
were threatened for wearing the tradition hijab. Such incidents
only remind us of the horrifying power of bigotry and the
obligations we all have to combat it.
Further, the invasion of Iraq, when combined with past policies
of the United States as they relate to the Middle East, has made
many people feel that Americans are seeking to impose their values
on others. We often hear those who are in conflict with the United
States are seeking to destroy our “way of life.” Yet,
Boykin’s lack of regard for people of another country and
religion can certainly be seen as a threat to these people’s
way of life. Comments like Boykin’s only serve to provoke
hate and fear among people of all faiths. Let us not idly dismiss
the rhetoric of Boykin concerning Muslims and Islam, for it is just
such inflammatory language that has spawned hatred and violence
throughout history.
If the attitudes behind comments like Boykin’s are
accepted and allowed to pass, the United States cannot expect to
end terrorism or any of the current conflicts in the Middle East.
To all of us, that thought should be far more terrifying than
Boykin’s remarks.
Bhaskar is a third-year political science student. E-mail
him at sbhaskar@media.ucla.edu.