http://idolator.typepad.com/intelfusion/2008/01/steven-coughlin.html
I haven't found any new information on the conflict, however I'd like to offer the possibility that Coughlin was fired for reasons other than being a "Christian zealot with a pen". Perhaps someone recognized that he wasn't qualified to be the Pentagon's sole expert on Islamic law. Why would I say that? Let's see:
* He doesn't have a degree in that subject.
* He doesn't speak Arabic, or any Middle Eastern language.
* His thesis on the subject doesn't provide adequate coverage of scholarly sources.
Larry Johnson, formerly with CIA and State, and the founder of Berg Associates, continues:
Coughlin and others of his ilk have been pushing the hysteria that there is only one Islam and all of Islam is intent on conquering the West. (Yes there are some Muslims who believe this, but Islam is not a monolith). Pandering to peoples’ fears is an effective propaganda ploy but it does little to help our soldiers understand the cultural roots and political/religious dynamics they find in the field. You would expect that in a war inside an Arab nation, that is predominantly Muslim, the Pentagon would hire renowned experts on the topics of Islam. Nope. We have Stephen Coughlin. We have a situation in which folks with no real expertise or command of Arabic are making fanciful claims about a religion and cultures they do not know intimately.
I compared Coughlin's view on shari'a law from his thesis with 2 different RAND studies on Islam. First, Coughlin writes on p. 93 of "Great Detriment":
"As the 'Umdat al-Salik states, "the four Sunni schools of Islamic law, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and hHanbali are identical in approximately 75 percent of their legal conclusions." (171). This paper will align its arguments to reflect those commonly held positions in Islamic law that are beyond the scope of being overruled."
The Muslim World after 9/11 (Angel M. Rabasa, et al; RAND Monograph prepared for the U.S. Air Force, 2004):
"Movement need not be in one direction only,. The possibility of modernizing Islamic law is recognized by Muslim scholars. Unlike the Quran and the sunna, shari'a is regarded by Muslims as man-made and therefore subject to interpretation. Several legal schools in Islam - the Hanafi, Shufi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools in Sunni Islam and the Jafari school in Hhi'ism - differ on the definition and relative weight of certain legal principles, particularly thye methods and limits of ijtihad (independent reasoning). At various times in the development of the Islamic legal tradition, disagreements among jurists was not only permitted but encouraged.
- Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples, New York: MJF books 1991.
Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, Strategies (Cheryl Benard, RAND National Security Research Division, 2003):
"Finally, in recent years, some movement has occurred in the areas of Islamic law, Islamic constitutions, and the like. The more interesting work of Muslim jurists has occurred where they took an eclectic approach, not restricting themselves to just one of the law schools but blending Islamic laws and interpretations from a variety of countries and sources with civil law, international norms, and new looks at orthodox Islamic concepts. "
- Khaled Abou El Fadl, Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women (2001)
In other words, if Coughlin's take on the immutability of shari'a law is so far off the mark, how can any of his conclusions be trusted? It's readily apparent when comparing authentic Islamic scholars like Khaled Abou El Fadl and Albert Hourani to Steven Coughlin that Coughlin was simply in over his head at J2 and, more importantly, that the Pentagon is in serious need of instituting a PISA-type security classification so that they don't need to limit their pool of academic resources to those who already possess a TS/SCI clearance.
