I, Muslim

When Issac Asimov proposed his famed Three Laws of Robotics, the idea of programmatic ethics concerning artificial intelligence took firm roots–inspiring the development of a whole literary genre centred around the future of technology amidst the turbulence of the global human society as it evolves towards the end of solving human problems. Inadvertently perhaps, the […]

When Issac Asimov proposed his famed Three Laws of Robotics, the idea of programmatic ethics concerning artificial intelligence took firm roots–inspiring the development of a whole literary genre centred around the future of technology amidst the turbulence of the global human society as it evolves towards the end of solving human problems.

Inadvertently perhaps, the question surrounding the wheres and wherefores of an intelligence that is becoming sentient or has already passed the Turing Test to be become sentient. The three laws: i) a robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm; ii) a robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law and; iii) a robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. This is supposed to be the creed that regulates the existence of artificial intelligence, subordinating this very existence to the interests of their human overlords.

At the beginning of the “global” century, communication and transportation technologies made the world close-in on itself and the idea of liberal multicultural societies also took root. As always when civilizations clash, the values held sacred by the conflicting parties become subject to the doctrine of necessity, which means that these parties more often than not become contradictions unto their own selves.

For instance, the Western values of liberal democracy and sanctification of human liberties and other sociopolitical entitlement is currently clashing with its own self. The state of Israel is a Western project and the West has made it more than clear that it will stick with Israel through thick and thin – for better or for worse. It does not matter if Israel murders 12,000 kids or dropped bombs on hospitals, Israel will always be the victim and the Palestinians will always be terrorists.

• After outcry, Plateau govt pledges to include Muslims in security committee
• Don’t allow social investment programmes to die, group tells Tinubu

Without the slightest shadow of a doubt, the Israeli state has the right and indeed a moral obligation to defend itself and its interests. No one will stand by and watch rockets, guided or not, rain down on its population centres. If I were a leader of any such principality that is at the receiving end of such aggression, I would act forcefully and decisively. This is axiomatic and non-negotiable.

But then, if Israel has an inalienable right to self-defence, doesn’t moral propriety and the strategic interests of collective humanity also mean that Palestine should also have the same rights? If Israel has an undeniable right to respond to aggressive attacks by anti-Zionist forces and exact vengeance for sins committed against it, does it not also make sense that Palestinians should also have those rights too?

If Israel can kill 26,000 civilians and chalk the blame up to Hamas – doesn’t fairness also dictate that Hamas also has the right to kill 14,000 Israeli civilians and chalk up the blame to the fact of the 70 years it has suffered under Israel’s brutal occupation?

A silent, yet very striking theme in fleshing out Asimov’s Three Laws is the dehumanisation of a being whom creators went to great lengths to humanise in the first place. The West makes such a big deal advocating the rights of Muslim women, of antisocial and rebellious Muslim youths, of Muslims of all demographics who align with the values of the West but diverge from Muslim culture… yet seem callously indifferent to Muslim lives.

The West never fails to trumpet its solidarity and support for Iranian or Afghan women who must observe their countries’ conservative dress codes and accuse Muslim countries of victimising and oppressing their women, because the demands of their cultures require modesty and reservation in women. But… somehow, their silence is worse than deafening as women are being slaughtered in thousands by Israeli bombs and bullets.

In the past few months, I have been asked so many questions even though I have asked many as well. I have been asked how I would handle the military operation against Hamas in Gaza, a presupposition that Israel is bending over backwards to avoid civilian casualties. It was attacked so it has only two options, they tell me. Israel can either respond even if that would entail the wholesale massacre of innocent civilians and the desolation of an entire city, or let it slide which means terrorists who “hate Israel and want to kill Jews” go scot-free. That’s of course a non-starter.

To those who have asked me questions, I answered with my own question: would Israel go berserk if Hamas was embedded among the civilian population in Tel Aviv, would Israel drop bombs on a hospital in downtown Haifa which is full of women and children and the infirm even if the whole world is shown a footage in which the “evil” duo of Yahya Sinwar and Isma’il Haniyeh can be seen on live TV launching rockets against Dimona?

I, or anyone really, have no obligation to solve Israel’s political problems. I have no solution, a solution Israel will like, on how Israel can achieve its legitimate military objectives in Gaza without killing 26,000 Palestinians, but that is not by any stretch of the imagination a license for the genocide unfolding in Gaza today. It’s no rocket science – Palestinian parents don’t have to teach their kids to hate Israel and want to kill Israelis. Israel is doing a magnificent job making that happen.

No one has to teach Palestinians the hatred of Israel, a quick look at Gaza is all one needs to see the reason why! Expecting Palestinians, young and old not to hate Israel is like ordering nature to get lost.

I’ve also been asked how the United States, or even my native Nigeria would react, if terrorists kept firing rockets and detonating IEDs against Israeli targets? I have also asked what they would do if someone shows up with a strawman argument to claim your homeland for themselves, then enslaved, imprisoned and brutalised you for 70 years? What would they do if someone murdered thousands of their children for absolutely any reason, or took bulldozers to cemeteries, exhumed and desecrated the dead bodies of their dead?

In today’s context, Israelis are the human beings while Palestinians are mere “human animals”, or at best robots who are hamstrung by laws and regulations that do not recognise their humanity or subordinate them to the primal interests of the other party.