.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Visit Freedom's Zone Donate To Project Valour

Saturday, May 28, 2005

No Way Out But Forward - Israel and Iraq

Maybe you can tell, maybe you can't. I'm in a better mood than I have been lately, in part because the AUT academic boycott went down. Down like the Titanic. Down to an ignoble end. Not as ignoble as it deserved, but at least we are heading in the right direction. As Tom Carter notes, the current rise of anti-Semitism is dangerous and a huge moral problem.

Carl at No Oil For Pacifists has an incredibly good roundup of links on the subject. He also observes that this isn't over and that the motivation remains. Carl fishes out the discarded AUT statements and exposes them to the light of day. Among others, Carl links to SC&A's outraged response to the boycott and David Pryce-Jones' excellent article about anti-Zionism and psychological warfare (PW) against Israel:
The master idea in this case is simplicity itself: Jewish nationalism, or Zionism, is an absolute evil, Palestinian nationalism is an absolute virtue. To establish this, the Jews must be shown to be wicked and wrong in every matter great and small, so that the Palestinians appear victims through no fault of their own, innocent people in special need of redress and rescue. With skill and persistence, the Palestinians and their Arab supporters have built up a worldwide PW lobby with helpers in the United Nations, the European Union, the Red Cross, the churches, the universities, and so on.
The truth is that the United Nations has taken the position that Zionism is racism, but the UN seems to believe that anti-Semitism is not. So much for the UN. Even the educated Arabs don't really buy this, no matter how much propaganda the mullahs may spread. From MEMRI, these excerpts from Saudi columnist Hussein Shubakshi:
"…The extent of tremendous hatred of the Jews is baffling. Therefore we ask, 'Why do we hate the Jews?'

"The immediate answer will be: 'No, we don't hate the Jews, we hate the Zionists.' [But] this is nonsense. We don't hear [preachers saying in their sermons,] 'Oh Allah, destroy the Zionists, the Zionist enterprise, the offspring of Herzl, and the Basel plan.' Is our current hatred of the Jews the result of the political situation in general and the Palestinian problem in particular? This is a pivotal and important question, and must be answered honestly.
He goes on to review the historical reality. The Palestinians cry for the right of return to Israel, but the Arab countries are not willing to allow the (probably hundreds of thousands) of Jews they expelled back. Until the world and Arabs are willing to discard their official rabid anti-Semitism, no real settlement will be made with Palestinians. The Arab world is beginning to look at Israel and Jews with a different eye. Beginning to. It will be a long, slow slog.

The question of our times is this - why, when the doors to peace are opening, is the western world sinking back into that fever of anti-Semitism? And how on earth could the AUT boycotters believe they are helping the Palestinian cause by engendering hatred of Jews? No rational, dispassionate person could believe that.

I will leave you with another link to an Arabic moderate discussed at MEMRI. This is MEMRI's summary:
On several reformist Arabic-language websites, Tunisian thinker Al-'Afif Al-Akhdar posted an in-depth analysis of the necessary reforms needed in the Arab and Muslim world concluding that secularism is vital for its future. [1] Secularization and modernization, he writes, are global historic processes that cannot be avoided in the long run. He also explains secularism is the key to full citizenship for men, women, Muslims, and non-Muslims, as well as to proper relations among all elements of society.

According to Al-Akhdar's analysis, Islamist thought is primitive and is incapable of accepting human thought over divine decree. He adds, Islamists seeking to prevent the modernization of the Arab and Muslim world, and struggle against secularism, is a manifestation of modernization. While their struggle is doomed to fail, he explains, it may nevertheless be impossible to skip stages of history, and Islamic countries may have to experience Islamic rule before finally despairing of its false promises to eventually adopt a secular regime.

Al-Akhdar rejects the argument that secularism is anti-religious, and maintains that there is nothing to prevent a secular state from allowing religious education – providing that it is modern religious education that has undergone reform. As an example of a country that has instituted educational reform and now teaches modern philosophy alongside Islamic philosophy, he cites Tunisia.

He also explains that secularism will lead to a disconnect from negative phenomena in Islam, such as autocracy and theocracy, yet at the same time will renew the connection with positive Islamic phenomena such as rationalist and philosophical thought. Additionally, Al-Akhdar finds elements of secularism in the cultural heritage of Islam, and claims that in nearly 1,400 years of Muslim history, clerics and rulers (caliphs) had a de facto division of roles and authorities between them.

Clarifying that in practical terms, the secularization process will be adapted to the conditions of each Muslim country, Al-Akhdar adds that women and minorities will be the promoters of the process since they are the main victims of Muslim theocracies. He also calls upon the world to condemn the Islamist education and media, and calls for a U.N. Security Council resolution sanctioning military intervention if Islamists use force against the weaker elements of society or take over a regime against the will of the country's citizens.
Now the US stands as an example that can support the arguments of the reformists in the Islamic world. Other western democracies are afraid of and hostile to religion - all forms of religion. Only in the US are Muslims really full members of western society. The Muslim world wants all the trappings of democracy, while also wanting to remain Muslim. Simple enough, and we must constantly insist that they can do it.

My contention is that the left, by fostering anti-Semitism and hatred of all religion, is the worst enemy of Muslims. They make no sense, they don't really believe in the right of Arabs or poor people around the world to develop their own forms of government and they don't seem comfortable with pluralistic societies at home. This is no model for peace. The left is more than willing to deal with and appease the worst fanatics in the Islamic world, but they don't really support Islamic moderates.

The truth is that the west started the rabid form of anti-Semitism we know today, the one which led to the massacre of millions of Jews in WWII, and the one which led to Israel's refounding. It is western documents, such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and "Mein Kampf" that are often used to support anti-Semitism in the ME. We started it, we're going to have to insist we were wrong and that there is a better way.

The dictatorial governments of the ME have the same stake that the Nazis and the tsars did in fostering anti-Semitism. It directs attention away from the abuses in their own countries. "Kill the Jews," they pay people to say, "and the problems of the world will be solved." This is all to avoid the people from noticing that their own governments are the ones who are oppressing them. It exports their revolutionaries and those who cry out against injustice. These corrupt people are using the mask of religion to turn their own freedom-fighters to crusaders against democracy.

The proof of my contention lies in Iraq. The vote and the new government there is such a terrible threat to these people that more and more "useful idiots" are sent into Iraq to kill themselves and Islamic innocents. The fight is not against the infidel, but against those who believe in human rights. Both Israel and Iraq are facing the same rage, the same bombs, the same fools. And Israel and Iraq share a common sin - a government elected by the people.


Comments:
The left is more than willing to deal with and appease the worst fanatics in the Islamic world, but they don't really support Islamic moderates.

Well said. In all the commentating and opining that goes on regarding this subject, that's the one fact I find most puzzling. Liberals of the American variety (or "progressives," if they insist on hiding behind that label) are exactly the people who shouldn't think that way. I've tried to figure out how bright people found their way to that opinion, but I just can't get there.
 
Tom, it's an absolute mystery to me as well.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?