Sympathy
Recently, one of our Colorado representatives (Tom Tancredo – R, CO) said something
even more stupid than usual (He is somewhat known for his ill-conceived remarks).
He basically said
that “…that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist
terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons…”. Mecca was given as a specific
example.
Many people have commented on the brilliance of making such a remark, of the potential
reaction in the middle east, etc., especially as this is coming from a government
official. I imagine, however, that the circulation of his remark was fairly small,
and frankly, compared to so many other remarks (and actions) made by our public
officials, it probably didn’t have that great an impact.
But, in a wider sense, it says a lot about some extremely common misconceptions
about the world we live in. I suppose it is a validation of our system that a representative
in congress is as uninformed as the people whom he represents.
Let’s start with the numbers. There are between 1 and 1.5 billion Muslims in the
world. There are about 1.9 billion Christians. So, for every 4 Christians in the
world there are 3 Muslims. When you are going around threatening groups because
of the acts of a handful of its members, that is one of those little facts to keep
in mind. Picking a smaller group (say representatives from Littleton, Colorado)
might be more sensible.
When you are dealing with a large group (even one considerably smaller than 1.5
billion) it would be extremely foolish to ascribe the motives of one subset to the
entire group. Within Islam, there are moderates, secularists, conservatives, extreme
conservatives, Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis, etc.
Then there are a handful of terrorists.
We don’t know the exact number, but I have seen estimates of around 10 – 20,000.
Out of a population of 1.5 billion, that is not even a blip of a corner of a fraction
of a percent. In some sense, though, this tiny group is not the problem.
Well, okay, in actual fact, they are the problem.
These are the people that our famous “War on Terror” is all about. The ones that
we have to stop. And, in some ways, it doesn't really matter what their motives
are – when they resort to violence against innocents, they lose the right to be
at the table. This is not just because of the morality of their actions – it is
because no reasonable government can negotiate at the point of a gun and expect
to be in power for long.
Not that I don’t think morality isn’t relevant, but it is equally important to remember
that the terrorists believe that they are moral as well, and in the right.
But, as I said, the major issue is not with the actual terrorists. The issue is
with the 20-40 million Muslims who actively support them, and the 200-300 million
Muslims who are sympathetic to them.
That is why the administration’s strategy is so wrong-headed, and why the remarks
of people like Tancredo are so worrisome. We are tipping the scales on those 200-300
million, and they provide the cover for those others.
We need to strip the extremists of their cover – and to do that we have to gain
the sympathy of those millions. Make it clear that, while we will do anything we
have to do to stop the 10K, we don’t arbitrarily associate them with the 1.5 billion
others. Make it clear that we are really out to stop terror, and not out to protect
oil interests or build permanent bases, or protect allies no matter how they behave.
Make it clear that, when we do engage, we will always stick to our own codes of
ethics, working towards a common good – not just for our own selfish self-interest.
How do you think it is going?
by Arlen
