Turning the pages of world history, Soroor Ahmed agrees that religious feuds have taken a huge toll of lives but avers that human beings have fought more bloody wars in the name of race, empire-building, civilization, secular nationalism than those fought for the sake of religion.
There is a general perception that many times more people have lost their lives in the world inreligious wars than non-religious conflicts. Recently a renowned Indian lyricist has also spoken onthis line. The Communists, secularists, atheists, etc. also hold this view.
No doubt, religious feuds have taken a huge toll of lives throughout the planet ever since itscreation. But a close analysis of history reveals something else, too. As it is very easy for thosehaving faith in Godless ideologies to spread such a view, an impression has been created that religionsshould be blamed for all the crimes in the world.
The truth is that the fault lies with human beings themselves. We have fought more bloody wars in thename of race, empire-building, civilization, secular nationalism, and even caste. So why just blamereligion.
After all, at least eight crore people perished in the two World Wars which were not at all fought in thename of religion as 75 per cent of those who had died were Christians. In the name of nationalism,Christians killed their own co-religionists, especially in ‘civilized’ Europe. The casualties in thesetwo bloodbaths of the 20th centuries were much higher than many great battles in several previouscenturies. The destruction caused were unmatched to any previous battles. The World War II actuallycame to an end after the dropping of atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What about the grisly carnages perpetrated by the Communist Stalin in the then Soviet Union and Mao’sChina. Crores were eliminated just because they refused to fall in line. The United States bombedVietnam to “the Stone Age” on the plea of containing Communism and at the same time to spreadCapitalism. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan can never be called a religious war. In the name ofCommunism, it was actually trying to reach the warm water of Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean. The jointNATO operation against Iraq in two Gulf Wars and in Afghanistan may be called the Christian versusMuslim conflict though the European powers and the United States would not accept this interpretation.
This may be somewhat correct assessment as a large chunk of the population in the West do not like itto be called Christian. In many countries, for example the United Kingdom, only 50 per cent peoplehave registered themselves as Christians. So, by that logic they are more inclined to call it acivilizational war between the West and East, be it in Iraq or Afghanistan.
What about the Japanese invasions of Korea and China in which millions were wiped out. Was Japanspreading any religion in its neighbourhood? Or was it exporting Shintoism or Buddhism when itlaunchedits attack on the United States on December 6-7, 1941?
Were the Hundred Years War, 80-year Wars and 30-Year War fought in the Medieval Europe reallyreligious in nature? In all these wars Christian kingdoms fought bloody and prolonged battles withinthemselves. In most of the instances both the quarrelling parties were from the same denominations.This is very much like the present war between Russia and Ukraine. Is there anything to do withreligion as both these countries have overwhelming population of Orthodox Christians.
In the Muslim world, barring a few earlier wars all other battles were carried out by the monarchsto expand their empires. They have absolutely nothing to do with the spread of Islam.
The marauding Mongols of the 13th century under Changez Khan, Kublai Khan and Halaku were not spreadingany faith of Mongolia. In fact, the later Mongols then converted to Islam after they conquered theAbbasid territories in Persia, Iraq, etc.
It is generally believed that the Crusades were religious wars fought between Christianity and Islam between 1099 and the late 13th century. What is conveniently overlooked is that the invading Christianarmies from the heart of Europe would indulge in pillaging and killing their own fellow believersenroute to Jerusalem. They killed thousands of fellow Christians in Byzantine on the plea that thepeople there did not cooperate. Even in Palestine these invading armies of Christian kingdomsmassacred the followers of their own faith.
True, a sizeable section of people, be it in India or elsewhere, are indulging in hate-mongering. Thesocial media has become the best tool to spread animosity. But this does not allow anyone to paint allthe religions in the blackest of colours. No religion teaches its followers to indulge in bloodletting.They all teach peace and social harmony. If some of the believers indulge in any crime, it does not meanthat the religion itself is wrong.
In contrast there are ungodly ideologies who openly call for the bloody overthrow of the system. Theirfollowers do not have any hesitation in carrying out their philosophies. Yet there are a whole lot ofpeople who would not utter a single word against them.They must read the history objectively beforejumping to any conclusion and in the process expose their own lack of knowledge.