The West likes to separate Islamist groups while they all follow the same discourse.

The West tries to distinguish between Islamist groups to unite with some against others. This approach, adopted by America and its allies, has unfortunately led to the growth and empowerment of monopolists who consider themselves the saviors of the human world. In the first step, they have brought disastrous results for people living in Islamic lands, especially the Middle East, and over time, these problems will spread beyond the region. The best example is the US agreement with the Taliban against al-Qaeda, which in the short term has faced the people of Afghanistan with a deplorable situation. In the long term, we must wait for many problems caused by this Islamist group's rise to power in other parts of the world.

I want to illustrate in this article that all Islamist groups in different sects in different regions follow the same discourse. According to this discourse, any Islamist group's rise to power will lead to the same disastrous results.

The Islamic world is the world of sectarianism and the classification of Muslims as religious-political groups. This grouping has been very intense in two eras. The first era after the death of the Prophet of Islam, especially after the killing of the third Caliph Uthman, became more intense and continued until the establishment of the Abbasid dynasty. The second period is traced back to the contemporary era. Although the requirements of these two eras are different, the logic of speech and persuasive statements are the same.

To explain this logic, we first pay attention to the beginning of Islam. Patricia Crone has an interesting metaphor. She compares the Islamic community to a moving caravan in which there is a high possibility of getting lost in dangerous deserts. For the caravan, the only way to save and survive is to accept the guidance of the caravan leader who knows the right and safe ways [1]. The imam or the leader of the community has the role of the leader of the caravan so that Muslims can achieve worldly and hereafter happiness by following him. The imam is considered both the political leader and the religious leader of the community. This dual position was primarily for the Prophet of Islam and after his death, the first four caliphs, who were all considered companions of the Prophet, also held the same role. However, after the third caliph, Uthman, the conflict between Muslims over the political leadership intensified. These conflicts form the basis of the recognition of a discursive system, knowledge, and understanding of Muslims from social and political life. The discursive system and the knowledge are based on the legitimacy of a particular person to guide the caravan in the dangerous desert but his competitors are all considered to have deviated from the true path of religion, and following them usually leads to destruction.

Although the continuation of these conflicts over time, along with the classification and formation of different Islamic sects, led to the separation of the political leadership from the religious leadership, however, this separation did not lead to the healing of the wound that was caused by the conflicts. Those conflicts have been like an "old wound" in the collective mentality, culture, and understanding of Muslims. These explanations show that the discourse of Islamic politics is articulated from two nodal points. First; The model of the caravan and the necessity of the presence of the "caravan leader" and the second is the "old wound" that arose after the killing of the third Caliph of the Muslims. Now, we refer to the contemporary period.

The modern world entered Islamic lands in various ways. Although the manner of its entry had a significant impact on the reaction of Muslims in different regions, what is the same everywhere; The confrontation of traditional and religious forces with it is like an epistemic system. Modernism as an episteme has been the most annoying for the traditional claimants of knowledge in Islamic lands. The reason is the wonderful consequences and achievements that modern science has brought to humanity. The more these achievements are understood by the Muslim communities, the more the authority of the claimants of traditional knowledge is at risk. Political Islamism has been the most important reaction of these claimants to modernism. Political Islamism is the effort of those who, with their traditional knowledge, intend to explain this great gap between the achievements of religious and modern knowledge systems. Now we can guess with which verbal structure these people are doing this. A discourse that is articulated around two nodal points: "caravan leader" and "old wound".

Therefore, once again, after the passing of centuries, we are witnessing the otherization of some Muslims against other Muslims. Influenced by the "old wound" proposition, it is claimed that the misery of Muslims in comparison with Western civilization has nothing to do with Islamic knowledge, rather it is the political leaders in Islamic lands who have caused this misery. They claim that commitment and adherence to true Islam could not only overcome this gap but also cure Western nihilism. Turning to the lifestyle of the righteous predecessor [1] and the true tradition of the Prophet through the formation of a group and party led by an individual or a group of people who only have contemporary chosen ones to play the role of "caravan leader". This return mechanism based on "old wound" and "caravan leader" is common to all Islamist groups. The difference between these groups is in their simple or complex actions. Groups with simple actions choose armed struggle and violent confrontation by excommunicating others. From the point of view of Takfiri groups, other Muslims, as well as everything that belongs to the modern world, are all symbols of infidelity and must be destroyed [2]. On the other hand, groups with complex actions seek otherization by proposing pseudo-philosophical debates and irrefutable intellectual debates. However, the result of the action of all these groups, believing in the "old wound", is to follow the "caravan leader" model, which leads to the monopoly of power by an individual or a few persons. The otherization of Islamic groups is not only for the identification and drawing of the difference between us and others. Others are misguided people who cause wandering and destruction of the caravan, so they should not be present in the political realm. Such an approach will lead to a monopoly in the political field. The monopolists think of themselves as "caravan leaders", the saviors of the human world, and by accumulating wealth, expand their claims to wider areas.

The confrontation of modernism with the Islamic world is a very complex phenomenon that needs to be examined and recognized from different aspects and in the fields of micro to macro, and policies should be made according to the findings. The caricature that the Islamists have drawn of this confrontation and intend to respond to the issue with only two components "old wound" and "caravan leader" has caused many tragedies Unfortunately, America and its allies are intensifying and perpetuating these disasters with a pragmatic approach and a short-term view by strengthening and continuing Islamic fundamentalism in the Middle East region. The policy of "separation" as I showed in another article about "separation of fields" has again caused such a problem in the case of "separation of groups". Using concepts such as "radical" and "moderate" to separate Islamist groups and choose a partner from among them to confront other groups has been a continued policy for years.

?

PS:

1-????? For more information refer to this book:

Patricia, crone (2005). Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburg University Press. ?

2-????? The most important Takfiri groups are Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram, and ISIS. These groups consider other Muslims as infidels and believe that they should be executed.

?