The US-Israeli war on Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have had a seismic effect across the world. In Southeast Asia, economies have been paralysed due to shortages of oil, liquified petroleum gas and other essential products usually exported through the strait.
The Philippines was the first country to declare a state of emergency as a result, but that has done little to alleviate shortages. The country has seen repeated protests against the spike in prices.
But the impact of the Iran war has not been confined to the socioeconomic sphere. The conflict has also affected Muslim communities in the country, particularly in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region. It has deepened polarisation among local Islamic scholars, threatening community cohesion.
When the war began, reactions on social media and in public were swift. Broadly, two camps emerged. One camp supported Iran’s retaliatory actions against the United States and its targeting of bases in neighbouring countries. The other camp opposed Iran, pointing out that it is a Shia nation and therefore hostile to Sunni communities.
This dynamic of clashing perspectives is nothing new among Bangsamoro’s Islamic scholars. An increasingly visible pattern of division emerged after the Abraham Accords established diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations.
The Philippines has had a long history of solidarity with Palestine. Demonstrations organised by both Muslim and non-Muslim activists have happened regularly. However, after the normalisation process, there were unprecedented statements from some Bangsamoro scholars presenting mobilisation for Palestine as an Iranian plot.
When Hamas carried out an attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the narrative clash deepened. Some scholars echoed Western media and pro-Zionist narratives, while others supported Palestinian resistance.
Although Islamic scholars are involved in this clash of narratives, this is not a mere theological debate but a manifestation of the entanglement of politics and religion. In the Bangsamoro context, where central authority remains fragile, external forces and dominant politico-theological frameworks from Arab countries are increasingly being imported into local discourse.
This continuing saga has significant internal consequences. First, the entanglement of religion and politics creates an indirect assumption among followers that these scholars hold reliable authority in geopolitics. Second, this polarisation weakens the formation of a cohesive identity in an already fragile political context. Third, some scholars take an extreme view towards their opposing side, labelling them as “deviants”, which may lead to radicalisation.
To address this situation, several considerations must be made. First, differences in the discursive domain must be dealt with on ethical grounds. Second, when addressing the Palestinian question, it is important to remember our own background. Third, divisive discourse on foreign issues could damage community cohesion.
Source: www.aljazeera.com