Tweet
It has been some time now since we have visited the stated goals of AQ. Many here are lamenting the fact that debate will be unlikely to change the mind of Apolytoners. Some have even rightly pointed out that this particular fact mirrors RL society. The reason for this, IMHO, is that we are not focused on the root philosophy of each side. So let's start there as best I can:
Goals of the "West" (In order of importance)
1.) Stabilize the flow and production of oil from the Middle East.
2.) Develop relationships with governments that maintain the status quo of power in the region (Two aspects...ME-West power relationship, and Arab-Isralei power relationship.)
3.) Encourage the democratization of the region and the rule of law.
Basic and probably incomplete, but it hits the high points.
Goals of al-qaeda(also in order of importance)
1.) Development of a pan-Islamic state with Taliban style government.
2.) Removal of all foriegn influence from the region in which the pan-Islamic state will develop
3.) Destruction or conversion of all non-muslims.
These are plainly stated in the AQ manifesto should you care to look it up.
This leads to the current conflicts that we see in the ME. To state that the Iraq war is not related to terrorism is to misunderstand the goals of both sides in this war. It is a manifestation of goals 1,2, and 3 for the "west" (in this particular case I assume you could read US), but it has also become a battleground that AQ cannot afford to loose as it is in conflict with goals 1 and 2 of their objectives.
Afghanistan has taken on less significance in this battleground because it has little to do with goal 1 of the west. It is still a battleground due to the fact that it satisfies goals 2 and 3 for the west and goals 1,2, and 3 for AQ. Here, however, one does not read the goals of the west as "the US". This is truly a joint effort and thus AQ's ability to divide the western powers is diminished. The application of their forces in Iraq is much more efficient from a political standpoint.
The problem:
1.) Removal of all western forces from the ME will not change the goal of AQ to establish a pan-Islamic state. In fact, it will make it easier. The rise in religious fundamentalism is gov't sponsored in many cases through the financing of Madras and allownace of strong religious influence in government. The autocratic nature of many of these governments and the economic benefits they receive fro relations with the west make them excellent targets for Iranian style or Afghanistan style fundamentalist takeovers.
In fact, the removal (achievement of goal 2 for AQ), would make it easier for the establishment of goal 1. The resulting pan-Islamic state would then be able to economically and, given enough time, militarily dominate the west.
2.) The west interest in the ME is and will most likely always be an economic one first. Let's face it, we all are dependent on oil for the way we live our daily lives. Until this changes, the west will most definately have a strong interest in the ME. The point of wheather or not this is "right" or "moral" is moot as this is just the way it is. As long as the ME world perceives that this is our primary goal, we will see the animosity for the west continue.
The Solution:
1.) There is no solution where all parties can achieve their goals. This, unfortunately, is true and will certainly lead to long term conflict on some level.
2.) Democratization and the rule of law must be encouraged in all countries of the ME. (not just the ones that we consider "problems")
3.) Economic development and increase of the standard of living in the ME should become a primary goal of the west.
4.) Establishment of secular institutions, including education, should be a primary goal of the west.
5.) International co-operation on tracking "money trails" of terrorist and taking action against the source should become a primary goal of the west. Should this lead to friendly governments (i.e. Saudi Arabia for example) then economic retaliation should be taken.
Summary
The issues involved here are far deeper than the presence of western troops in the ME or the international efforts of AQ. The problem is one that is nearly irreducible. It is extremely naive for anyone to link AQ attacks to eithier Iraq or Afghanistan. They are merely the justification of the moment for AQ. The attacks would be in place as long as AQ's atated goals are unmet. The only relationship may be the selection of current targets, but not the fact that targets would be being selected.
To be successful in the long run, the west must couple their economic need with economic, political, and rule of law development in the ME. Until this happens, over the long term, we will continue to see an active and politically influential AQ.
Goals of the "West" (In order of importance)
1.) Stabilize the flow and production of oil from the Middle East.
2.) Develop relationships with governments that maintain the status quo of power in the region (Two aspects...ME-West power relationship, and Arab-Isralei power relationship.)
3.) Encourage the democratization of the region and the rule of law.
Basic and probably incomplete, but it hits the high points.
Goals of al-qaeda(also in order of importance)
1.) Development of a pan-Islamic state with Taliban style government.
2.) Removal of all foriegn influence from the region in which the pan-Islamic state will develop
3.) Destruction or conversion of all non-muslims.
These are plainly stated in the AQ manifesto should you care to look it up.
This leads to the current conflicts that we see in the ME. To state that the Iraq war is not related to terrorism is to misunderstand the goals of both sides in this war. It is a manifestation of goals 1,2, and 3 for the "west" (in this particular case I assume you could read US), but it has also become a battleground that AQ cannot afford to loose as it is in conflict with goals 1 and 2 of their objectives.
Afghanistan has taken on less significance in this battleground because it has little to do with goal 1 of the west. It is still a battleground due to the fact that it satisfies goals 2 and 3 for the west and goals 1,2, and 3 for AQ. Here, however, one does not read the goals of the west as "the US". This is truly a joint effort and thus AQ's ability to divide the western powers is diminished. The application of their forces in Iraq is much more efficient from a political standpoint.
The problem:
1.) Removal of all western forces from the ME will not change the goal of AQ to establish a pan-Islamic state. In fact, it will make it easier. The rise in religious fundamentalism is gov't sponsored in many cases through the financing of Madras and allownace of strong religious influence in government. The autocratic nature of many of these governments and the economic benefits they receive fro relations with the west make them excellent targets for Iranian style or Afghanistan style fundamentalist takeovers.
In fact, the removal (achievement of goal 2 for AQ), would make it easier for the establishment of goal 1. The resulting pan-Islamic state would then be able to economically and, given enough time, militarily dominate the west.
2.) The west interest in the ME is and will most likely always be an economic one first. Let's face it, we all are dependent on oil for the way we live our daily lives. Until this changes, the west will most definately have a strong interest in the ME. The point of wheather or not this is "right" or "moral" is moot as this is just the way it is. As long as the ME world perceives that this is our primary goal, we will see the animosity for the west continue.
The Solution:
1.) There is no solution where all parties can achieve their goals. This, unfortunately, is true and will certainly lead to long term conflict on some level.
2.) Democratization and the rule of law must be encouraged in all countries of the ME. (not just the ones that we consider "problems")
3.) Economic development and increase of the standard of living in the ME should become a primary goal of the west.
4.) Establishment of secular institutions, including education, should be a primary goal of the west.
5.) International co-operation on tracking "money trails" of terrorist and taking action against the source should become a primary goal of the west. Should this lead to friendly governments (i.e. Saudi Arabia for example) then economic retaliation should be taken.
Summary
The issues involved here are far deeper than the presence of western troops in the ME or the international efforts of AQ. The problem is one that is nearly irreducible. It is extremely naive for anyone to link AQ attacks to eithier Iraq or Afghanistan. They are merely the justification of the moment for AQ. The attacks would be in place as long as AQ's atated goals are unmet. The only relationship may be the selection of current targets, but not the fact that targets would be being selected.
To be successful in the long run, the west must couple their economic need with economic, political, and rule of law development in the ME. Until this happens, over the long term, we will continue to see an active and politically influential AQ.
FP!
Comment