In recent weeks, President Bush has delivered a series of major speeches outlining his strategy against terrorism. We have come a long way from the nebulous rhetoric of the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001.
The foe is no longer defined as ``terror," which is simply a tool used by a well-defined adversary. The new ``National Strategy for Combating Terrorism" acknowledges that America's enemy is a ``transnational movement of extremist organizations . . . which have in common that they exploit Islam and use terrorism for ideological ends." The report then outlines measures to confront that challenge. While short-term measures such as denying terrorists sanctuary or tracking their funds seem logical , the administration's long-term strategy is less straightforward.
The obvious cure to the problem is tackling radical Islam, the ideology that motivates terrorists. But the administration believes firmly -- almost blindly -- that democracy is the right medicine. According to the report, democracy ``diminishes the underlying conditions terrorists seek to exploit." Promotion of democracy is, therefore, the key element in the administration's long-term approach.
Yet democracy does not always have these healing powers. The administration contends that individuals who enjoy political participation and can freely express themselves are less likely to embrace fundamentalist messages. The truth is that today democratic societies are spawning terrorists no less than dictatorships are.
The core Sept. 11 hijackers grew up under autocratic Middle Eastern regimes, yet embraced radical Islam only when they went to study in Germany. The young terrorist suspects arrested in London and Toronto, the vast majority of whom were second-generation Muslim immigrants in the West, shunned the values of their native societies and planned attacks against them. A recent round of routine Al Qaeda threats against the United States were delivered on tape by Adam Gahdan, who grew up in democratic Southern California.
Aside from not guaranteeing results, spreading democracy in the Muslim world is a monumental effort that requires changing cultures and overcoming entrenched skepticisms. Some oppose the concept because it clashes with their divinely ordered vision of government. For Islamists, a small but vocal minority in the Muslim world, the only source of legislation is God and his will is set in the Sharia; parliaments and other democratic institutions are illegitimately trying to replace God's will with man's. Others look at democracy with suspicion, as a form of government imposed by foreign forces.
A word often abused by local autocrats who cloaked themselves with it, democracy is viewed as just one of the ideologies that failed the people of the Middle East. Moreover, its difficult application (see Iraq) only increases the doubts of skeptics. At this point in time democracy is far from the magic bullet against fundamentalism. Spreading democracy to the Muslim world is an extremely difficult task whose achievement does not guarantee the end of radicalism.
Confronting the enemy on its own ideological ground seems to be a better option. Rather than simply calling it brutal and tyrannical, the administration needs to directly challenge Islamist ideology. The task is not easy, but some of the enemy's ideological weaknesses can be exploited.
The main one is the intellectual poverty of its offer. Al Qaeda and other such groups are crystal clear about what they oppose, but they have made no argument to prove they could offer a better tomorrow to ordinary Muslims. If they ever achieved their lofty dreams of avenging Muslim pride and re establishing the caliphate, how would they make it work? Do they have an economic plan? And how about fixing potholes and collecting garbage? Only few in the Muslim world would sign up for a Taliban-style state that lacks everything except public executions.
Islamist ideology is powerless when confronted with the basic duties of governance. Look at the Palestinian territories, where Hamas's recent unpopularity is derived from its inability to pay salaries and deliver basic services. Promotion of democracy is an ambitious goal whose prospects for success are unclear. What can produce immediate gains is a head-on challenge of the enemy's ideological shortcomings.
No comments:
Post a Comment