The War on Terror: Four Key Concepts
There are, in fact, only two conceivable scenarios by which the requisite pan-Islamic upheaval will happen. The more humane scenario is the one being pursued by the Bush Administration–that is, establish a democratic Iraq in the heart of Islam and hope that it inspires moderate Muslims to reject the radical elements among them. The cost, in this case, will surely be tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of Muslim lives.
But what if democracy in Iraq fails outright? Or what if it survives but fails to inspire the overwhelming majority of Muslims to reject the radicals? In that case, Islamic terrorism continues unabated. What follows then is the “Hobbesian” scenario Harris sketches: Sooner or later, the United States will take one hit too many, or one hit too catastrophic, and the American people will set aside their natural aversion to mass bloodshed and demand a disproportionate response. They’ll elect a government which promises to end the threat, permanently, whatever the cost–and the cost will likely be millions of Muslim lives. Like the German and Japanese civilians in 1945, Muslim civilians from North Africa through the Persian Gulf and down into Southeast Asia will at last feel their absolute defeat. They’ll accept that the fundamentalist struggle against the West has been lost. They’ll dig out from the ruins of their cities and recognize that they cannot allow the radicals to make martyrs of them all. Then, with our assistance, both military and financial, they’ll set out to purge themselves of the terrorist cancer.
Tragically, the Hobbesian scenario is the more probable of the two. Muslims, collectively, have spent the last five centuries making one disastrous decision after another. That’s the unvarnished truth. The idea that democracy in Iraq, if indeed it takes hold, will inspire Muslims throughout the region to do what needs to be done ranks as a long shot. Still, as the Bush administration seems to understand, it’s worth a try.
This is something the ‘anti-war’ crowd doesn’t understand. Most of us in the ‘pro-war’ crowd are pro-this-war because we do understand our people. And we’d rather not go ‘Hobbesian’.
6 Comments
OMG Can we email that to every Liberal? They wouldn’t read it! I answered my own question. I feel stupid for even suggesting it. Great Post
I have been saying this on every site I visit for some time, and I am hardly alone in doing it. Usually I am blunter: GWB is trying as best he can to avoid our wiping Islam and its followers from the map.
I concur. I support whatever it takes to exterminate all those responsible for 9/11. While I’d prefer not to have to kill every Muslim on the planet, it won’t bother me if that does turn out to be necessary.
I agree that these are likely scenarios. I believe that every generation has to learn it’s own lessons. And unfortunately peace does not beget peace.
“And unfortunately peace does not beget peace.”
Will Durant said, “‘Peace’ is the name of the ideal we deduce from the fact that there have been interludes between wars”. I would caution that the conditions found in the one state are not likely to be found in the other, nor that the two should be confused in any other way.
One thing is neglected in your otherwise excellent scenario…..
The Muslim nations (READ: Saudi) have Major problems with even maintaining their own monarchy/control in this day, and the lack of stability, while an apparent bad sign, could just become a positive one forcing some moeration toward Democracy to help the leaders survive……Will they do this? I have not clue…it boils down to how deeply their conviction that they are the “chosen” is…..