>Maybe after they set off a nuke you'll
>change your tune? Or will you just blame
>it on the West's failure to deal
>with "Arab/Muslim grievances"?
>
>It seems to me Al-Qaida wants to resurrect
>the Caliphate which is pretty unreasonable,
>while the UN has voted a number of times
>in support of the Palestinians.
>
>What are these Arab/Muslim grievances exactly?
>Infidel American bases in the holy land? Weak
>tea. Dead Iraqi children? Hussein and bin
>Laden aren't simpatico, even if they have a
>non-aggression pact.
>
>Al-Qaida wants a return to a society like
>the Taliban were running. I don't consider
>their desire a "grievance." And those that
>were/are financing Al-Qaida included the Saudi
>elite and the Pakistani security elite. They
>don't exactly represent the Arab/Muslim world.
Peter,
I realize I may be taking some things about Israel as obvious that may not be, because my family has a lot of Israeli friends and I have Israeli friends who are here in the US. But I must repeat that both you and Hitchens are reproducing -- EXACTLY -- the arguments and tone that are used by Likudniks and former Israeli progressives who've now seen the light about the evil Palestinians. I'm serious: I've heard Israelis (as well as people here) saying these things almost word for word. (Maybe Bryan can speak to whether I'm generally right about this.)
Nonetheless, you believe that Israel/Hamas and the US/Al-Qaida are very different situations. As I understand it, this is based on two points:
(1) The Arab/Muslim world doesn't have big, legitimate grievances against the US and the West generally. Therefore (2) Al-Qaida demands are completely preposterous, and there's nothing the US can do (except killing them) that will lessen the danger of Al-Qaida.
Regarding (1), I haven't run through the ugly history of the US and the West generally in the mideast because I assume you know it. But I will do so if you want. It is significantly more gruesome than even Israel's actions. And of course it INCLUDES massive support for Israel's actions.
For now, though, let's keep just to the specific complaints of Al-Qaida. The three main ones to date have been American troops in Saudi Arabia, the treatment of Iraq, and Israel.
Before saying anything else, I should emphasize that I take it as given that Osama bin Laden couldn't possibly care less about the Palestinians or Iraqi children -- just as Saddam Hussein couldn't care less about Palestinians or Iraqi children, and just as Donald Rumsfeld couldn't care less about the gassing of the Kurds or indeed the 3,000 Americans who died on September 11. In all three cases they use the suffering of people far from power to whip up support for their own ambitions. I guarantee you Osama bin Laden would be happy to see every Palestinian dead if it served his purposes, just as Donald Rumsfeld would be happy to see you and me dead.
BUT, Osama bin Laden talks about these things, just as Donald Rumsfeld weeps crocodile tears over 9/11, because they know these are real grievances of their audiences.
Regarding Israel, I don't think I have to make the case to you. Its actions are a source of anger and bitterness to the entire Arab world.
Regarding the deaths of Iraqi children, it cuts absolutely no ice in the Arab world to say that Hussein and bin Laden aren't simpatico -- or even that Hussein deserves some of the blame. True. So what? The point to them is that there are a fucking lot of dead kids, and America's hands are very bloody.
Regarding the soldiers in Saudi Arabia, you can say that's weak tea. Well, to many Muslims IT'S NOT. You saying that it is doesn't make it so, most especially in the context of other US actions -- it's just another humiliation on top of everything else. Moreover, it's the height of arrogance for Americans to say: ho-hum, big deal, our troops are stationed in some country. Nobody anywhere likes troops from somewhere else in their country, particularly from foreign cultures. Believe me, Americans wouldn't love it so much if there were a lot of Saudi troops stationed in the US.
I think it's fair to say these issues are part of "official" Al-Qaida doctrine. There are other things that are purportedly from bin Laden that may or may not be. But whether they are or not, we should pay attention to them, because they are crafted to appeal to the grievances of the Arab world. For instance, there's a letter circulating that's supposedly from bin Laden, available at http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,845725,00.html. Here are two of the things it mentions:
"You steal our wealth and oil at paltry prices because of your international influence and military threats. This theft is indeed the biggest theft ever witnessed by mankind in the history of the world. "
"Your policy on prohibiting and forcibly removing weapons of mass destruction to ensure world peace: it only applies to those countries which you do not permit to possess such weapons. As for the countries you consent to, such as Israel, then they are allowed to keep and use such weapons to defend their security. Anyone else who you suspect might be manufacturing or keeping these kinds of weapons, you call them criminals and you take military action against them."
Can you say that these are not completely legitimate grievances?
Now, mixed in with the legitimate grievances, the letter has ravings about "the Jews" and US debauchery, plus calls for the US to accept Islam. You can say that this means that Al-Qaida will continue to attack us until we live under Shariah. What do you want us to do, all convert to Islam?
You can say that. In doing so, you would be acting exactly as Ariel Sharon, who would tell you: look, Hamas and Hezbollah are Islamic fundamentalists, and their official doctrine calls for the destruction of Israel. What do you want us to do, disband Israel?
Regarding Israel, of course, the alternative is for it to accept a genuine Palestinian state and try to live in peace with its neighbors. This will massively reduce Palestinian support for terrorist attacks. There will still be people calling for the destruction of Israel, but they won't be able to get many others to go blow up buses full of schoolchildren.
Regarding the US, the alternative is for us to force Israel to adopt a two state solution, treat Iraq fairly, and generally get the hell out of the mideast. There will still be people calling for the US to live under Shariah, but they won't be able to get others to fly planes into buildings.
In both case, Israel and the US should do the right thing. Not more than the right thing -- I don't say Israel must abolish itself, or all Americans must convert to Islam. Just the right thing. And that will be enough.
You can say this is politically impossible for the US, and maybe it is. It also may be politically impossible to get Israel to get out of the occupied territories. In fact, I think that might require a civil war in Israel, just as there was almost a civil war when France got out of Algeria.
NONETHELESS, those are the only solutions for Israel and the US. They might not work perfectly. But nothing else will work at all. Nothing.
Finally, I should say that, yes, if Al-Qaida sets off a nuke and I survive I will keep whistling the same tune -- and yes, I will lay a great deal of the blame at the feet of the US government.
Look, I live in New York. Someone I know was killed at the World Trade Center. Other neighbors were at work in the Trade Center when the planes hit. I would be thrilled to shoot bin Laden in the head if I got the chance. But I am not willing to sign up for George Bush's war on terrorism.
I suspect you know the story of Nurit Peled, the daughter of Israeli general and peacenik Matti Peled. He was often called a self-hating Jew, soft on terrorism, etc. Nurit Peled herself is a longtime peace activist and proponent of Palestinian rights. And I'm sure at some point another Israeli said to her, "Maybe after a suicide bomber kills your child you'll change your tune?"
Then in 1997 a suicide bomber DID kill her 13 year-old daughter in Jerusalem. Her response was not to celebrate reprisal attacks, but to say that the Israeli government "sacrifices our children for their megalomania -- for their need to control, oppress, dominate."
So, Peter: I would bet you $1000 that Nurit Peled agrees with me rather than you about Al-Qaida. Would you take that bet? And if not, why not?
Reed
PS My apologies for the monstrous length of this post.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com