One Hand Clapping

Bush draws the battle lines even more sharply
I have been saying for a long time the war against radical Islamism is a religious war, even though we of the West think we fought our last religious war centuries ago. Two proclamations from authorities on both sides this week illustrate it to the point of proof.

First, President George W. Bush today:

So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.

No other quote is needed, really. If the president had approached the podium, uttered this one paragraph and sat down, his speech would have been no less complete.

Turn we now to The Islamic Army in Iraq 's statement of Jan. 13:

Our view of the [Iraqi] elections: ...

As the praised one [Allah] has said, 'And kill them until there is no more dissent and the religion of Allah is supreme.' ... When the infidel Americans and their allies became weak and the burden [of Iraq] became unbearable, they decided to rescue their remaining dignity by using so-called democracy to rule over us using our own people. ...

... In this statement we reveal some evidence of why democracy should be prohibited and why it stands in opposition to the religion of Allah [italics mine]

Here is a sample of the reasons the Islamists say that democracy is forbidden and its Muslim practitioners killed.

1.) Ruling is for Allah alone - not for the people - and the people should merely obey Allah's commands and his Islamic law..." ...

3.) The religion of Allah is complete, as are his Islamic laws comprehensive and complete. Therefore, casting ballots over his already known and established laws is considered to be the worst of the forbidden acts. ...

6.) The basic concept in democracy is 'rule of the majority', yet Allah in his power and majesty has demonstrated to us before that the majority of the people have strayed from the path [of the religion]... so how are we to let that majority lead us when most people are ignorant?

There are 12 points in all. Some of the other points are redundant; a summary is thus:

Leaders in Islamic societies are to be chosen based on their religious credentials alone. But elections "eliminate these prerequisites."

The role of leaders in Islamic societies is to implement the laws of Allah, not laws made by human beings, which is what Jews and Christians do.

Legitimacy comes not from elections but from the laws of Allah. To think otherwise is idolatry, "the idolatry of democracy."

In democracy everyone is equal, however the laws of Allah do not.

Rules for enfranchisement in a democracy include no assessment of piety, but are instead arbitrary.

Any Muslim participating in an election or democracy becomes an infidel. Anyone establishing a constitution based on "garbage from infidel ideologies becomes even more of an infidel."

Democracy is a trick used by Jews and Christians to deceive the people.

And finally, the key words:

No one should be fooled by the infidel religion of democracy and by the concept of freedom... [italics added.

Back to the president today:

We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. ... History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.

The battle lines are well drawn and should be well understood by all Americans and Europeans. If religion can be defined as that which forms one's ultimate concerns, then the war against Islamic terrorists should be defined as a religious war - even more so because, as the president explicitly realized today, America was founded on the notion that human liberty is a condition of our creation by God. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his 1774 essay, "A Summary View of the Rights of British America,"

The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time. The hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them.

The Islamists, of course, don't see it that way. They concluded:

Let everyone be aware ... that the establishment of the religion of democracy in Iraq will be a stab in the backs of the mujahideen and a victory for the crusaders - even if America leaves [Iraq] ... .

Liberty as we conceive it is at the heart of the conflict. For Islamists, the most desirable state of human society is not one that is free, in the Western sense, but one that is submissive to Allah, according to the dictates of Quran. This state of society is dar al Islam , the world of peace. Anything else is the dar al harb, the "world of war." Societies, peoples or nations are either at war with Allah or at peace (through submission) to Allah.

This concept of submission is the matter of ultimate concern to Islam generally and is enormously amplified by radicalized Islamists. In their view, no sacrifice is too great to achieve their ends, and no violence is unjustified. I don't think we have reached the point yet of widespread American understanding that the war is one of ultimates for us as well.

Dennis Mullin, who traveled widely in the Islamic world for 10 years as a foreign correspondent for U.S. News and World Report and other publications, wrote in the WaPo in 2003 that "The present war is really a crusade" fought by Islam against the West- and non-Western non-Muslims.

The al Qaeda leader, in the "Letter to the American People" published last November and attributed to him, [made] very clear that bin Laden's ultimate goal is to undermine Western civilization in its totality, [and] strongly implies that even if Israel didn't exist, he would still be pursuing what is really, as reluctant as we are to say it, a religious crusade in the true historical sense.

Throughout history, disruption of the social and political order of the day has been a regular occurrence. But this is a different kind of fight, one with long roots in the past and one that will last long into the future. In the letter, bin Laden purportedly said, "it is to this religion that we call you," implying the need for a global theological upheaval. ...

Lest there be any doubt that what is going on now is a real crusade, and not just a protest against American hegemony, it is important to note that al Qaeda and other Muslim forces are now or have been engaged in conflicts not just against the West proper, but against Hindus in Kashmir and increasingly in other parts of India, as well as against Orthodox Russians in Chechnya. Moreover, the Muslim Uighurs are fighting the mostly Buddhist Chinese; and Muslims are doing battle in Indonesia and the Philippines. ... Muslim extremist cells are operating in scores of countries, and their cross-border cooperation in training and financing gives credence to the assumption that the driving force is not strictly localized grievances (witness Kenya, Bali) as much as a clarion call to a worldwide transnational Islamic revival.

Our enemies wish us lethal harm, have present means to inflict it and seek means to deliver mass destruction to our shores. There is a large, well-funded terrorist organization, active in many nations, possessed of men who will die to achieve their aims. Sept. 11, 2001 and terrorism in Iraq prove that they have the will to do so. If Iran's mullahs or North Korea are not actual allies already, they will be, especially if we give them or their successors years and years to do so. The campaign against terrorism is foundationally a contest of wills - and dare I say it, a spiritual struggle.

The real issue is whether the Western Civilization shall prevail against the last vestige of medievalism; whether the rule of men who behead their prisoners, enslave their women and deny the rights of self-determination to their own people, shall kill us and displace us, to whom the individual and individual rights are sacred and whose laws require respect for freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and whose traditions preserve freedom from fear and cruelty. In the long history of civilization, this task is to be done now.

Update: James Joyner has a roundup of editorial reactions, and Tim and blogicus has a lengthy roundup with commentary also.

by Donald Sensing, 1/20/2005 06:48:35 PM. Permalink |

Blogroll:

News sites:

Opinions, Current Events and References

Useful Sites:

Shooting Sports

DVD bestsellers

Military History and Politics:

Religion bestsellers: