[Dean's World] Dave Schuler: To Find an Answer

[notify at powerblogs.com]

Posted by Dave Schuler:
To Find an Answer
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1170514617.shtml


   I guess this post is a variation on the tiresome âwhy do they hate
   us?â question. It's not uncommon to run into statements along the
   following lines: Islamist radicalization and the hatred for the United
   States (or, at least, hatred of the U. S. government) among Muslims
   are solely or primarily due to our policies there and, in particular,
   to the presence of the U. S. military in the Middle East (which
   predates the invasion of Iraq). Here's an [1]example of such a
   statement that, I think, is typical of the genre from Jeb Koogler of
   Foreign Policy Watch (he's also an associate blogger at the great
   blog, The Moderate Voice, [2]which directed me to Jeb's post):

     Indeed, it's important to remember that this phenomenon of
     radicalization has occurred overwhelmingly since 9/11, despite the
     fact that "multiculturalist" social policies had been in place long
     before that. Since this radicalization has occurred almost
     exclusively in the past few years, and since most British Muslims
     claim to be adopting a harder line because of western policies in
     the Middle East, I think it's safe to say that it is aggressive US
     and British foreign policies that have caused this crisis.

   I think that the narrowest possible construction of Jeb's statement,
   that the increase in radicalism among Muslims in Britain since 2001 is
   largely due to the the U. S. invasion of Iraq and British
   participation in it, is probably a fair one. However, in the form in
   which it's presented Jeb's post is quite problematic. It is riddled
   with fallacies and other logical problems notably, appeal to authority
   (those cited as authorities aren't), appeal to unnamed authorities
   (âmost analysts agreeâ), over-generalization, and unsupported
   assertions and assumptions.

   I'd like to consider a couple of broader questions. First, is violent
   radical Islamism rising? If so, is it increasing due to (mostly)
   American foreign policy with respect to the Middle East?

   Answers can be distilled into several distinct currents
    1. violent radical Islamism isn't rising
    2. violent radical Islamism is rising and it's a consequence of U. S.
       foreign policy (an extension of Jeb's position cited above)
    3. violent radical Islamism is rising, mostly due to factors other
       than U. S. foreign policy and, particularly, due to factors within
       Islam itself (an extension of Michael van der Galien's position
       alluded to above)
    4. It's more complicated than that.

   My own view is #4. I think that violent radical Islamism has probably
   been around for more than a thousand years and I don't honestly know
   whether it's increasing or not. It's possible that it may merely
   appear to be increasing to Western eyes. Modern communications,
   transportation, and the migration of peoples may simply be bringing
   out into the light something that was already there.

   If, indeed, it's increasing, I do think that U. S. policies with
   respect to the Middle East contribute to the increase. Unfortunately,
   [3]as I've mentioned before, those policies have evolved over time and
   the people of the Middle East haven't allowed much else in the way of
   acceptable alternatives. Either everybody is going to have to accept
   those policies and deal with them and their consequences or the U. S.
   must disengage from the Middle East in a major way. That will have
   profound economic consequences for the entire world, I can't imagine
   that happening, and, frankly, I doubt it would slow whatever rise
   there is in violent radical Islamism.

   Here's what I'd like to open up for discussion. Let's narrow the
   conversation to the period between 1968 and 2000 inclusive i.e. from
   the Six-Day War to the day before the attacks on September 11, 2001.
   How, specifically, should the U. S. have acted or reacted differently?
   Please be specific e.g. not âstop supporting Israel unconditionallyâ
   but rather how should we have changed our reaction to a specific
   incident during the period. Please limit the recommendations to things
   that were actually possible including politically possible in the
   United States. Also, please include what you believe would have been
   the consequences of the change.

   Don't critique Jeb's post hereâgo over to Jeb's place via the link and
   do that.

   I'm searching sincerely here. Please be civil.

   Cross-posted from [4]The Glittering Eye

References

   1. http://fpwatch.blogspot.com/2007/01/i-was-not-convinced-by-michael-van-der.html
   2. http://themoderatevoice.com/uncategorized/the-extremism-question-why-do-muslims-become-radicalized/
   3. http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=2315
   4. http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=2648