Deprogramming Terrorists
Hamoud Abdulhamid al-Hitar has gotten some media coverage in the U.S. from time to time, but not in any large way, as far as I can tell. When you Google his last name, the search page asks you if you meant to type "Hitler." I definitely did not.
Al-Hitar is a supreme court judge and human rights proponent in Yemen. He's taken the lead in a fascinating project to eliminate terrorists -- by talking them out of it.
He heads up the government-sponsored Theological Dialogue Committee, which takes imprisoned jihadis who have been to Afghanistan to fight the Great Satan and talks them back down to earth using the same Quranic language that got them into Osama's clutches in the first place.
"Most of them had learnt the Quran by heart and were quite knowledgeable in Islamic rules, but they misuse them,” Hitar said. So he as assembled a committee of clerics, who know the Quran as well as the Islamists, and better.
They take their subject out of prison settings, to a more neutral place. And they understand that many of them are poor boys, deeply religious but illiterate, who have been fed half-baked theology out of vicious minds.
It becomes an old-fashioned theological slam, a contest of learning and wisdom and skill that Thomas Aquinas would relish. "If you can convince us that your ideas are justified by the Koran, then we will join you in your struggle," al-Hitar tells the militants. "But if we succeed in convincing you of our ideas, then you must agree to renounce violence."
And the debate is on. Al-Hitar claims a 90 percent success rate. His clerics have talked to more than 300 suspects who subsequently were freed after convincing the committee they had given up violent ways. Al-Hitar describes it like this: "It's similar to the work of a doctor. We diagnose and we treat it.”
It's difficult to tell, from my distance, whether this is a rubber-stamp parole board, or whether these converts stay clear of al-Qaida in the long run. But the process is intriguing enough that, apparently, some branches of the U.S. military, as well as sources in France, have sought to learn more about it.
Recently the Christian Science Monitor gave him a look, and a positive review. I have seen his work, via this article, noted approvingly on some Western Muslim and anti-Bush sites. But there's no reason that supporters of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan and Iraq shouldn't applaud this, too, if it's working. We want to end the menace of religious fundamentalist terrorist killers. Very well. Killing them is one way. Sowing democracy is another. Theological debates may be yet another.
Al-Hitar is a supreme court judge and human rights proponent in Yemen. He's taken the lead in a fascinating project to eliminate terrorists -- by talking them out of it.
He heads up the government-sponsored Theological Dialogue Committee, which takes imprisoned jihadis who have been to Afghanistan to fight the Great Satan and talks them back down to earth using the same Quranic language that got them into Osama's clutches in the first place.
"Most of them had learnt the Quran by heart and were quite knowledgeable in Islamic rules, but they misuse them,” Hitar said. So he as assembled a committee of clerics, who know the Quran as well as the Islamists, and better.
They take their subject out of prison settings, to a more neutral place. And they understand that many of them are poor boys, deeply religious but illiterate, who have been fed half-baked theology out of vicious minds.
It becomes an old-fashioned theological slam, a contest of learning and wisdom and skill that Thomas Aquinas would relish. "If you can convince us that your ideas are justified by the Koran, then we will join you in your struggle," al-Hitar tells the militants. "But if we succeed in convincing you of our ideas, then you must agree to renounce violence."
And the debate is on. Al-Hitar claims a 90 percent success rate. His clerics have talked to more than 300 suspects who subsequently were freed after convincing the committee they had given up violent ways. Al-Hitar describes it like this: "It's similar to the work of a doctor. We diagnose and we treat it.”
The committee members find themselves talking to militants about the true concept of Jihad, the need to respect the rights of non-Muslims in a Muslim country and renouncing violent ways. Hitar says their arguments are based on the Quran.
It's difficult to tell, from my distance, whether this is a rubber-stamp parole board, or whether these converts stay clear of al-Qaida in the long run. But the process is intriguing enough that, apparently, some branches of the U.S. military, as well as sources in France, have sought to learn more about it.
"Yemen's strategy has been unconventional certainly, but it has achieved results that we could never have hoped for," says one European diplomat, who did not want to be named. "Yemen has gone from being a potential enemy to becoming an indispensable ally in the war on terror."
Recently the Christian Science Monitor gave him a look, and a positive review. I have seen his work, via this article, noted approvingly on some Western Muslim and anti-Bush sites. But there's no reason that supporters of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan and Iraq shouldn't applaud this, too, if it's working. We want to end the menace of religious fundamentalist terrorist killers. Very well. Killing them is one way. Sowing democracy is another. Theological debates may be yet another.
