.jpg)
A.P. photo/ Center for Study of Traumatic Stress
New America Foundation’s Robert Wright assesses the breaking point that propelled Major Hasan into the Ft. Hood massacre.
Mr. Wright’s thesis is not new, but he puts new arguments into it. He asserts that under modern conditions, our wars may be radicalizing Muslims into becoming terrorists, even in our own country. He questions whether terrorists need foreign countries, when they can use the Internet to radicalize our own Muslims. With Internet and its video, powerful emotional messages reach across the seas. The videos contain images of Americans killing videos. This strains less emotionally strong individual Muslims to their breaking point. Radical imams encourage such individuals to take action. Becoming the butt of suspicion at work, further alienates Muslims.
The fact that very few U.S. Muslims have taken such action convinces Wright that Islam is not inherently a belligerent religion.
Wright makes a distinction that conservatives just wanted to kill terrorists, whereas liberals wanted to kill terrorism. (NY Times, 11/22, Opinion).
The assessment contains creative thinking, unfortunately rendered less plausible by Mr. Wright’s succumbing to the temptation to rub his thesis into conservatives. One wonders whether his case on terrorism is driven by a desire to triumph over conservatives.
It was President Bush who called ours a “war on terrorism.” Few well-known people suggested that we devise a strategy against the ideology, although I recall some conservative commentators doing so. I think Wright’s ideological partisanship is misguided, in what must be a unified and non-partisanship national effort to fashion a workable strategy.
There have been American Muslim attempts at terrorism, but not many. Their limited number does not prove much about Islam. Muslim numbers here have not attained the critical mass that emboldens violent types. Suppose their numbers grew?
The question Wright should ask is why does terrorism infect Muslims more than people of other faiths? Why are they liable to become radicalized? Why do they identify with radical Muslim organizations, rather than scorn their terrorism? Can something be done about radical abuse of Internet, as a criminal or war matter, without taking away our own freedom? A sound strategy requires asking and answering.
How tempting Wright’s thesis must be for those who would like a simple way to abandon wars against terrorists! It would be even more tempting if he advanced an alternative. Does our immigration policy protect or imperil us, in this regard?
Wright declares that terrorists don’t need bases in host or failed states, to harm us. It seems to me that the resources that such havens allow terrorist organizations to amass enable them to plan major operations like 9/11. Each country they take over not only fastens their type of dictatorship upon millions of people, but enables them to gather more national resources against the remaining countries. Wright does not seem to have asked, what if we don’t stop state-by-state take-over.
Whether the U.S. still has the resources to mount such wars is a question, too. We need a strategy that does not require the old style mass-invasion.
Another question is why we have tolerated radical regimes, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, which finance radical mosques and terrorist organizations. The mosques and madrassas that they subsidize graduate potential terrorists as fast as we kill them, and those states provide the necessary arms. Wright did not comment upon whether such mosques and madrassas are rising in the United States.
(For more on Major Hasan, click here )
Comments