During any major political endeavor, especially those which involve sacrifice and huge amounts of spending, politicians will compete to tell us why the endeavor is necessary. All arguments focus on Why? this is necessary.
However, the details of the how always seem to be overlooked. Close to nine years after 9/11, the war in Iraq draws to an end (we hope), the war in Afghanistan continues, skirmishes in Pakistan, conflict between Israel and Palestine, the threat of terrorist attacks continues and we are told WHY we must remain engaged.
Very little discussion is focused on how we are engaged; more importantly how we end this peacefully. It is very hard to find balanced perspectives which illustrate what has been done right and what has been done wrong.
For this reason, I would like to give Kudos to STRATFOR on their analysis of the issues. Here are three key reports which not only analyze competing interests but also the fallacy that systems which work well in one country can be readily transferred to other countries which do not share the same cultural beliefs, priorities, or modus operandi.
Baghdad Politics and the U.S.-Iranian Balance http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100419_baghdad_politics_and_usiranian_balance?fn=9216094818
Three Points of View: The United States, Pakistan and India http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20100427_three_points_view_united_states_pakistan_and_india?utm_source=GWeekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=100428&utm_content=readmore&elq=5ddd8ae7c9da4f5e8fce416543cdf229
(Forthcoming: Israeli-Arab Balance of Power)
These reports are republished with permission of STRATFOR
There is also an excellent framing of the terrorism debate which puts things in a much more appropriate context than the one offered by politicians. The current anti-terrorism activity is not about U.S. versus Muslims or claiming that people hate us because we are American.
It is about understanding the Jihadist movement which represents various extreme and fragmented factions within Islam (just like we have extreme and fragmented factions within Christianity) Lest anyone has forgotten what the terrorism in Northern Ireland was like or the Oklahoma City bombing, Wako, the KKK, neo Nazi groups, etc. here are some reminders of Christian terrorism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/2432/the_return_of_christian_terrorism________/
http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/bibs/tergps/tgdom.htm
The current anti-terrorism debate is also about recognizing that there are just as many Muslims opposed to Jihad as there are Christians and, instead of trying to lead the fight against Jihadist factions, the U.S. needs to take a secondary role and support the Muslims who are opposed to Jihadist extremists.
The Jihadist Strategic Dilemma http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20091207_jihadist_strategic_dilemma
This report is republished with permission of STRATFOR
We need to learn to see past the rhetoric and start to see the people. One has to ask oneself, if the need to survive is the most basic of human instincts, what makes a person over ride this instinct to survive and become a terrorist or suicide bomber? What could possibly be so wrong that death is considered to be a welcome alternative?
There are a multitude of reason but for now I will just point to two as they relate to the war in Afghanistan.
Poverty: When someone has nothing to loose including hope for the future,
radicalizing them is a piece of cake.
Experiencing Hatred from Others: Those who are not poor can be radicalized also. 60 Minutes interviewed a former radical this past Sunday.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/23/60minutes/main6425491.shtml?tag=currentVideoInfo;segmentTitle
He grew up in London’s middle class but saw how his white friends were
constantly attacked (beaten & stabbed) just because they would walk
with him in public. When Iraq was attacked, the agrument that the US
is at war because we hate Muslims seemed perfectly logical to him.
This is what is so worrisome about all the current anti-Muslim rhetoric – it
reinforces such beliefs. To put things in a different perspective, as a Catholic, if suddenly news media and people were to start saying “wearing a crucifix around your neck is bad or should be banned,” or saying “all Catholics
are sex offenders just look at what their priests do,” I would become
radicalized too! Needless to say when he witnessed tortures during
interrogations his beliefs became even more extreme.
Ironically, it was being thrown in prison with some notorious
extremists (e.g. Anwar Sadat) that changed his perspective. They
showed him he was wrong and the war is about power not hate. He now
spends his time trying to convince other Muslims that it is not a war
about religion. Uphill battle though. His wife left him calling him a
sellout.
The differentiation between power and hate may seem trivial. However, for many, power/oppressive power is something you can bargain with and eventually overcome. Hatred is a non-starter to which the only response is reacting with like violence. Turn the other cheek is a lesson most of us have heard. However, when it comes to how we behave, our instinct to defend ourselves and retaliate typically makes us forget this lesson.
The lesson from all this?
It is not just the actions of our politicians and soldiers which matter. It is the actions, thoughts and words of each of us in our daily lives which also have an impact on this war. What we say and do DOES matter, especially when others (i.e. the whole world) are watching!
Cecilia Wandiga's Blog 