Al-Jazeerah History
Archives
Mission & Name
Conflict Terminology
Editorials
Gaza Holocaust
Gulf War
Isdood
Islam
News
News Photos
Opinion
Editorials
US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
www.aljazeerah.info
|
|
Boston, Brazil, and Islam:
Irrational Rhetoric, Illegal Wars
By Ramzy Baroud
Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, May 6, 2013
During his talk sponsored by the New American Foundation in
March 2008, author Parag Khanna addressed the rising challenges facing
the US's global hegemony. According to Khanna, China and the European
Union are the new contenders with the battlefield being a global
‘geopolitical marketplace.’ Aside from Khanna’s insight, one
statement particularly puzzled me greatly. "Why am I talking about
Europe, China, and the United States? What about Russia, what about
India, what about Islam ..what about all those other powers?" Initially,
I thought it must have been an error. The speaker must surely realize
that Islam is a religion, not a political entity with a definable
‘geopolitical marketplace.’ But it was not an error, or more accurately,
it was a deliberate error. Khanna went on to explain that Islam doesn’t
have ‘that kind of coherence’ that allows it to spread its power and
influence, unlike the dominant other powers which he highlighted.
According to that odd logic, Islam and Brazil were discussed in a
similar context. This sort of twisted reasoning has flourished
as an academic discipline-turned-industry since the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001. Sure, it existed prior to this date, but its
‘experts’ and their then few think-tanks were largely placed within a
decidedly pro-Israel, Zionist and right-wing political orthodoxy. In the
last decade or so, the relatively specialized business multiplied and
became mainstream wisdom. Its numerous ‘experts’ – who are more like
intellectual purveyors – became well-known faces in American news
networks. Their once ‘politically incorrect’ depiction of Arabs, Muslims
and the non-western world at large, became acceptable views which were
then translated into actual policies used for invading countries,
torturing prisoners and flushing Holy Korans down toilets. It is
impracticable to rationally argue with those who are essentially
irrational. Many of us have tirelessly tried to wrangle with those who
want to ‘kill all Muslims’ whenever someone claiming to be a Muslim is
accused of carrying out or planning to carry out an attack somewhere in
the world. The ‘debate’ rages on, not because of the power of its logic,
but because of the heavy price of blood and gore that continues to be
paid due to the deliberate misinformation, utter lies and subtle (and
sometimes not so subtle) intellectual racism that defines much of the
American media and academic discourses. Numbers are of no
relevance in such discussions because absurd media pundits are not
swayed by facts. In the United States, there have been nearly 900,000
gun fatalities in the last 30 years or so (1980 to present) compared to
around 3,400 terrorism-related fatalities in the last 40 years or so
(1970 to present). These figures include victims of the terror attacks
of Sept. 11, 2001. This unsurprising fact was recently referenced by
MSNBC’s All In With Chris Hayes and raises some critical points.
If the US wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen (plus numerous other
lesser acts of violence committed in the name of ‘fighting terror’) were
indeed compelled by the preciousness of American lives, then the least
US Congress should do is tighten gun control laws in their own country.
But respected members of Congress are fighting the good fight to keep
things as they are, in the name of protecting the Second Amendment to
the United States Constitution - “..the right of the people to keep and
bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” But rights are infringed at
will whenever it suits US foreign policy makers and their intellectual
peddlers. Despite the fact that the war on Iraq was illegal and that
torture of prisoners is a loud violation of the US’s own Constitution
and the Bill of Rights, America’s war rages on and the Guantanamo gulag
is thriving. One cannot help but think that the US’s legal, political
and even moral blind spots must always somehow involve Muslims.
But of course it’s more complicated than this. Muslims are not targeted
because they are Muslim. Yes, of course, religion and skin color are
important layers in the massive ‘crusade’ – a George W. Bush term, not
mine – in America’s so-called war on terror. But ‘hating Islam’ is also
a convenient pretense to achieve foreign policy objectives that are
centered around imperial domination, thus natural resources. Neither
American foreign policy makers, nor their media cheerleaders who hardly
take a day off from smearing everything Muslim, are not interested in
Islamic theology, history, spirituality or values that are meant to
espouse uprightness in the individual and righteousness in the
collective. But there is an army of dishonest people who would rather
comb through every shred of Islamic text to highlight passages out of
context just to prove that Islam is fundamentally flawed, teaches hate
or ‘anti-Semitism’ and that it celebrates a supposed ‘culture of death.’
These very men and women would have done the same, as their predecessors
have, to demonize any other culture, religion or community that sat on
large deposits of oil or dare exist in an area of strategic importance
to the United States or within an alarming proximity to Israel.
The anti-Islam tirade received another boost following the Boston
Marathon Bombings of April 15, 2013, which were blamed on two
American-Chechen brothers, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The
anti-Muslim circus was back in town, as political jugglers, along with
media acrobats seemed to reach the ever predicable conclusion: hate all
Muslims and do whatever possible to exploit any tragedy to further US
hegemonic interest in the Middle East. Eric Rush, a Fox News pundit,
summed up that sentiment when he called for the killing of all Muslims
following the bombings and then later claimed that his tweets were meant
to be sarcastic. Ann Coulter, on the other hand, called for women to be
put in jail for ‘wearing a Hijab.’ This type of hate-mongering
is of course not random, no matter how palpably ‘crazy’ the people
behind it are. It is an essential component of ensuring that a largely
uninformed public is always on board whenever the US is ready for yet
another military adventure involving Muslim countries. All of
this rhetoric must also be juxtaposed with what is happening in the
Middle East. There, yet a new war is brewing, one that is largely aimed
at ensuring that the current chaos underway in the so-called ‘Arab
Spring’ countries will yield favorable results from the view points of
Israel, America and the west. The new push for military intervention
started with Israeli allegations that the Syrian regime is using
chemical weapons against opposition forces, followed by British-French
allegations, and finally, despite brief hesitation, concurred by U.S.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Over 70,000 people have
reportedly been killed in the Syrian civil war. In the last two years it
has become a hub for unprecedented regional and international rivalry, a
Great Game of sorts. The US, Israel and their allies have watched as
Syria, once considered a ‘threat’ to Israeli security, descended into
inconceivable brutality involving the Syrian army, various factions and
bands of fighters from near and far. It was a matter of time before the
US and its allies made their move to seal Syria’s fate and to ensure
quiet at the Israeli northeastern frontier. For that to happen,
Muslims must be hated and dehumanized in ways that would make war a tad
less ugly and future violence, in some odd way, ‘justifiable.’
The official purpose of Hagel’s recent visit to Israel was to finalize
US arms sales to Israel and other countries which total about $10
billion. Knowing how such weapons have been used in the past, one can
hardly appreciate the ‘sarcasm’ in Eric Rush’s tweet of wanting to ‘kill
them all.’ Per the history of US foreign policy, violent words often
translate into violent action and here lies the real danger of the
supposedly crazy bunch who equate Islam to Brazil and wish to
incarcerate women for wearing scarves. - Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net)
is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of
PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is: My Father was A Freedom
Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story (Pluto Press).
Fair Use
Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
|
|
|