Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:41:22 -0800
From: "C. J. S. Wallia" <cjwallia-AT-indiastar.com>
Subject: Naipaul on 11 September



                                    Naipaul finds US aims, allies dubious

                                                      From L K Sharma
                                                      DH News Service
                                                    WASHINGTON, October 31

Nobel Laureate V S Naipaul said if America wished to eradicate 
terrorism it could not have acquired one ally who was the paymaster 
of terrorists and another ally who provided the foot soldiers. He 
said he supported the war against terrorism but was not sure that it 
was a war against terrorism, probably it was something else. As a war 
against
  terrorism everywhere, it had been compromised by such alliances, he said.
  Naipaul was asked about America's war after he had finished reading 
a chapter from his new novel, "Half a Life" before a 1000-strong 
audience in Washington. More than one questioner dragged the man of 
literature from fiction to fact and from the world of the fifties to 
contemporary America.

  He said he was appalled by the terrorists' attacks and commended the 
stand taken by the British Government. He was very critical of the 
British media including the BBC and the people there who were being 
craven. The attitude in Britain seems to be that if you do nothing 
about terrorism, it will go away and if you do something, it will 
anger the terrorists.

In reply to another question, he said it was difficult to see an 
Islamic country becoming democratic. The tradition of Islam was to 
have spiritual and political leadership combined and to have a strong 
ruler. He said he had great worries  for countries including 
Indonesia, Pakistan and Iran. He also commented on the the support 
that Osama bin Laden  finds in Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Iran.

He told the "New York Times" he was not surprised because "these are 
the people who are not Arabs". "Part of the neurosis of the convert 
is that he always has to prove himself. He has to be more royalist 
than the king." The converted is always trying to destroy the remnant 
of the unbeliever in one's customs and in one's ways of thinking. 
"It's this wish to destroy the past, the ancient soul, the 
unregenerate soul. This is the great neurosis of the converted."

He said "non-fundamentalist Islam" was a contradiction. The idea in 
Islam, the most important thing, is paradise. No one can be moderate 
in wishing to go to paradise. The idea of a moderate state is 
something cooked up by politicians looking to get a few loans here 
and there.

  In reply to a question on the cause of September 11 attacks, Naipaul 
said religious hate, religious motivation, was the primary thing. 
"There is a passage in one of Conrad short stories of the East indies 
where the savage finds himself with his hands bare in the world, and 
he lets out a howl of anger. I think that, in essence, is what is 
happening".

The world is getting more and more out of reach of simple people who 
have only religion. And the more they  depend on religion, which of 
course solves nothing, the more the world gets out of reach. The oil 
money in the 70's gave the illusion that power had come to the 
Islamic world. It was as though there was a divine supermarket, and 
at last it had become open to people in the Muslim world. They didn't 
understand that the goods that gave the power in the end were made by 
another civilisation. That was intolerable to accept, and it remains 
intolerable".


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---