Soothing rhetoric - scary reality

[Colorado Blue]

This excellent op-ed piece about the growing power of democracy vs. entrenched terror groups in the "New Middle East" is timely in the wake of yesterday's elections, in which Hamas made a good showing against the dominant Fatah. Also highlighted are recent efforts by Western governments to communicate, across the Middle East, with groups like Hezbollah and Muslim Brotherhood, and make them diplomatic partners.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=Rubin&itemNo=573065

The death of Yasser Arafat and the fall of Saddam Hussein have changed the political landscape of the Middle East. Iraqis defied insurgent threats to vote in their first free election in a half century. Palestinians likewise queued to elect a new leader. The democratic wave spread fast. Lebanese outrage at the assassination of former prime minister Rafiq Hariri in February culminated in the end of Syria's long occupation and the demand for truly free elections.

The democratic wave has emboldened dissidents to voice unprecedented criticism against dictators. In Damascus, for example, Aktham Naisse openly called for the repeal of the emergency laws upon which the Syrian regime derives dictatorial power. In Libya, Fathi al-Jahmi, a former provincial official, challenged Muammar Gadhafi to hold contested elections. In Egypt, Ayman al-Nour likewise challenged President Hosni Mubarak.

snip

Despite its harsh rhetoric about the war on terrorism, the Bush administration has also gone wobbly on Hezbollah, an organization responsible for the terrorist murder of more Americans than any other group prior to September 11, 2001. According to two former Central Intelligence Agency officials, President Bush authorized outreach to the group in the wake of the World Trade Center attack. The dialogue continued despite Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah's October 2002 comment that "if they all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide."

snip

In Egypt, too, American officials have reached out to Islamists whose commitment to the democratic process is dubious. Asharq al-Awsat reported last month that American diplomats had held talks with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group whose armed wing is responsible for thousands of Egyptian deaths. Not long after the diplomats' visit, terrorists detonated a bomb in a popular market and sprayed a tourist bus with bullets.

snip

Finally, the author summarizes the dilemma by concluding that it is impossible to deal as statesmen, with groups "who target civilians for political gain", even though they might also provide charitable or social services.

I think it will be interesting to see how the newly elected Hamas politicians conduct business. Needless to say, I hope they do not use their political standing to conduct more terror, but to fulfill their municipal duties.

[bennywhale]

1. This reaching out is

not surprising considering the American government has never considered the IRA to be "beyond the pale".

Indeed Gerry Adams who has blood up to his elbows is usually given the red carpet treatment in New York on St. Patricks day.

I think Bush is finding that Terrorism/freedom fighters (whatever they want to class a particular group at a particular time)is not as simple as his mind led him to believe

[Colorado Blue]

2. This book that Coastie recommends, I've just started reading

it - it's called "House of Bush, House of Saud" - touches on this issue. Also of course, the oil issue which is HUGE in global politics.

Oil industry/auto industry - whoa. These are the really huge players out there that nobody ever sees - they're so much a part of daily life, people rarely stop to consider their effect on geopolitics and the global economy. What we SEE, is the tip of the iceberg - a regime here, a war there - things that don't really make sense.

(I wonder how much of the motivation for BOTH World Wars was actually rooted in a desire to control the oil fields of Asia? The First World War in particular doesn't make a whole lot of sense UNLESS you take that aspect of it - the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and acquisition of direct regional control - into account? And Hitler's attack on Russia?)

It's like missing the forest for the trees - forests of oil derricks, countless millions of cars with internal combustion engines, air transport, buses, plastics, fertilizers, paints, petrochemicals - it's endless. Also, I don't think people like to think about the degree to which they're part of the pipeline, so to speak.

Now that the "third world" is developing, things will become even more complex and pressurized. There will be more wars over this resource - UNLESS we do what we should have done 50 years ago and develop viable alternatives.

Environmentally, people KNOW but can't stop it. The inertia is tremendous.

Sorry if I got sidetracked a bit! But I believe the whole modern Mideast has been shaped and influenced by oil at least as much as by any other factor.

Back to the issue of "freedom fighters" and/or terrorists - why is the IRA given the red-carpet treatment, as you say? Is there great sympathy for their cause here? With respect to the M.E. - do you think this is a productive thing to do, to try and engage these groups in political dialogue, as though they are statesmen?

[bennywhale]

3. In areas with a lot of Irish Americans

there certainly is or was. The IRA was primarily funded by groups in America some with charity status. While the IRA bought semtex and guns wiith money some of which was used to blow innocent british people to bits in shopping centres and pubs.

Gerry Adams has been to New York on almost every St. Patricks day for a long time and invariably the White House. Its always shown on British TV.

In terms of dealing with Terrorists. It depends if they have specific aims. From the history of Europe Terrorism has never been resolved by military might alone and always whether covertly or not deals are struck, and settlements reached.

If demands are obviously beyond consideration such as Al Qaeda then no. Also they are mure murderous than any other terrorists.

But you can drain their support. Support people and help people that are from their traditional recruiting demography. Give in on things that they may not demand but certainly drives their ideology amongst the dissaffected. eg US troops oput of Saudi Arabia. Withdraw support for Tyrants in muslim countries (without invading and killing more)

Terrorism can't be defeated by might alone.

RE: WW1. You may have a point. However the system devised between the superpowers to keep peace was shit and eventually led to war.. It was kind of like a cold war but without the nukes. The idea being that each power, Britain France and Russia on one side and Germanu Austro-Hungary Turkey on the other would have such massive standing armies that it would deter the others from attacking. Unfortunately complex alliances led to everyone declaring war on eachother when Austria invaded the Balkans.

Also you must remember Europe has been a battleground for Millenia and its ALWAYS about power, just depends what sought of power so you may well bre right.