Francified by Larry Hall Jul 12, '05 / 5 Tammuz 5765
I don't see what the fuss is about. Every day, I read and hear pronouncements about the 'war on terror', and who is fighting it and who is not. I turn on the television and see White House spokesmen and Pentagon generals blithely claiming to be leading the assault. Tony Blair wants in on the action as well. The British prime minister vows, in the wake of the latest horrors in London, to beat the terrorists and preserve "our values." George Bush stands alongside him, praising the steadfast British people, and promising both victory and the triumph of compassion.
Politicians and press alike recommit to a multi-pronged strategy, one that effectively makes no sense, but holds their devotion nevertheless:
* Fight terrorism 'resolutely' while blurring the identity of the terrorists. Allude to the fact that they are Islamists, but do so rarely. When you do, immediately state that they are a tiny minority within 'this great monotheism' and 'religion of peace.'
* Build 'democracy' in the Arab/Islamic sphere. This is a vital leg in the strategy, for it emboldens the 'moderates' who are reckoned to be well over 90% of all Muslims in the world. Build this democracy for the Arabs and Muslims by first overthrowing their dictators. Then, actively help build new institutions of democracy.
* 'Get at' the root causes of the Islamist surge. Identify these as oppression by dictators whose thinking and behavior is Islamist (though somehow not Islamic). In this way, spark the power of creativity and individualism that is widespread in the West. Empower the oppressed (moderate) Muslims to become entrepreneurs and capitalists. End the poverty that 'causes' Islamism.
* Just as important, end the 'Palestinian-Israeli' conflict. Simultaneously identify it as a primary cause of Islam's enmity towards the West and claim it is primarily a conflict over territory – utterly divorced from Islamic attitudes towards non-Muslims and Jews in particular. Identify with the Islamic (as distinct from Islamist) position on Israel, using ancient Western, Christian attitudes towards Jews. Pressure Israel and strengthen the terrorists who threaten her. Do this by declassifying them as terrorists, which can only be done by questioning Israel's legitimacy. In this way, build 'good will' that is lost by the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
* While fighting terrorism resolutely, building democracy relentlessly and addressing root causes (especially Israel) systematically, gradually lance the Islamist boil. Top the recipe with a generous layer of 'compassion' or self-promotion.
In other words, base an entire strategy on illusion. Base it on a thorough misunderstanding of the very enemy you are fighting. Create the fog that enables this grotesque misreading by repetition of truisms that serve as a collective narcotic.
* No matter how many times Islamic terrorists strike the infrastructures and symbols of the West, deny that they represent the mainstream of Araby and Islam.
* No matter how many times Muslims clarify that economics and political progress are merely disposable subsets of Islamic dictates and values, ignore them and cleverly engage in social and economic planning on their behalf (Iraq, Gaza, etc.).
* No matter how often mainstream Muslim religious figures stress that Islam is the one true way and that non-Muslims are infidels, label them as 'extremists' with little public support.
* No matter how often Arabs declare that Israel is to be erased and replaced by a Muslim state, renew 'negotiations' and declare that a (dictated) two-state solution west of the Jordan River will 1) be imposed and 2) will end the conflict.
The 'war on terror' is fatally flawed. It is racist and condescending in how it defines: 1) enemies; and 2) potential allies. It systematically ignores mainstream Islamic thought. It fits Islamists into a Western mode, where paradigms of individualism, capitalism and personal freedom dominate. It makes the astonishing assumption that most Muslims already share the core of Western values, and that only a firebrand and tiny Islamist minority is faithful to the basic messages of Muhammad and those who followed him.
The 'war on terror' is run by a club of Western elites who also effectively exclude, at least by intent, two primary frontline states in the real war. Those states are Israel and India - shoved aside despite demonstrable pedigrees as constant targets of Islamism since their founding. In both cases, their exclusion is eased by old Western racial and religious prejudices. Worse, they – especially Israel – are listed as causes of Islamic/Islamist rage, while the existence of Great Britain or the United States supposedly increases that rage not one bit.
Most relevantly, they are excluded because the West's leaders will not identify Israel's and India's enemies as their own – Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria and, yes, Pakistan. To do so would cast a bold light on the personal and economic ties between Western elites and Muslim oil powers. It would illustrate how the West inadvertently funds the very enemy that it fights (according to constricting and constricted paradigms).
Worse, the two objects of this exclusion essentially agree to their status. This is especially so since the change in Indian government and the transformation of Ariel Sharon and Israel's Likud party into a vessel for the continuation of the Oslo policies of their Labor 'opponents.' (Reports from Israel portray Sharon's determination to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza by 2008, despite all indications that it will constitute merely an enlarged form of the current, virulent Palestinian Arab identity.)
Now, why are we going on about the French - you know, those people who dealt with the Nazis and paid off the Iranian mullahs in the 1980s? How different are we today? Until there is a war of conceptual reformation in the bastions of the West, the 'war on terror' will sputter on, complete with the latest ghastly scenes from subway tubes and tree-lined streets.
