jh
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Yet another example of why it isn't Islam versus the West
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 04:05:13 GMT
From: <Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog>
"Chechens' Terror Links Drawing Attention,"* by Vladimir
Isachenkov, /Associated Press via Yahoo News/, 26 September 2004,
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040926/ap_on_re_eu/russia_terror_ties_1.
This story mirrors a recent Journal story on the Chechen leader Shamil
Basayev. My basic take on that article was that it showed how radical
Islam and al Qaeda were becoming an umbrella organization to which
"adherents" flowed simply out of necessity, changing their spots along
the way. Basayev, in that article, was described as a very recent
"convert" to Islam. What struck me about that article was that it
reminded me how, during the Cold War, many revolutionary leaders "found"
Marxism. Why? Typically because they were first turned down by the West
or?specifically?the U.S. Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh wrote his declaration of
independence from colonial master France, cribbing it whole-cloth from
Thomas Jefferson's original. He saw himself as a natural George
Washington, and couldn't understand why Washington could not. We didn't
recognize him as such, because France was a big ally vis-ˆ-vis the Sovs,
so guess what? Ho had to become communist and Vietnam suffers that
choice to this day.
Am I suggesting we should have sided with Basayev? No way. I see that
independence movement as just more fracturing of the Core, as well as
historically irrelevant/counterproductive to the larger integration
processes of globalization. All I'm saying is that when you can't join
one side, you're left with the other, and the other right now is radical
Islam. When this happens, you'll see that transnational movement absorb
all sorts of cats and dogs, Basayev being one of them.
This article points to the opposite effect: not only are the Basayev's
of the Gap switching their stripes to join the radical Islam camp, but
the radical Islam camp is basically accepting all comers. Point is, this
movement, which always had a tenuous grip on religion because of the way
it twists the Koran to its own cruel ends, will become increasingly
divorced from that larger meaning over time as it accepts all comers who
share the same basic end: kill the Westerners and drive them from our
lands. Now, in effect, both sides of this equation are actively
recruiting the other side, just like it was with the
ideologically-barren-but-entirely-opportunistic Soviet bloc for the
latter half of the Cold War (or basically, after they made their peace
with the West with dŽtente).
Did we create this phenomenon by invading Iraq? No, but we certainly
accelerated it. Could we have prevented this phenomenon from emerging?
Also no. Radical Islam is the best offer out there right now to those
hoping to offer prolonged violent resistance to the expansion of the
global economy and its "nefarious ways" of "perverting local cultures."
Since the global economy (the Core) is impinging right now primarily
upon those regions where Islamic faith is most in abundance, this
us-versus-them breakdown was not only in the works, it was inevitable.
The only question for the Core is how fast we seek to engage this
struggle: do we hold off, accept the offer of civilizational apartheid,
and wait them out? Or do we seek to actively transform the Middle East,
bring it into the larger global economy in a broadband fashion and?by
doing so?end its disconnectedness and defeat those committed to
perpetuating and deepening that disconnectedness?
I say, embrace the tough tasks with zeal. They only grow worse from
delayed action.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
