And Then They Came After Us
  We’re at war. How about acting like it?

  By Victor Davis Hanson
  National Review Online| July 22, 2005
  http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200507220816.asp 

First the terrorists of the Middle East went after the Israelis. From 1967 we 
witnessed 40 years of bombers, child murdering, airline hijacking, suicide 
murdering, and gratuitous shooting. We in the West usually cried crocodile 
tears, and then came up with all sorts of reasons to allow such Middle Eastern 
killers a pass.

Yasser Arafat, replete with holster and rants at the U.N., had become a 
“moderate” and was thus free to steal millions of his good-behavior money. If 
Hamas got European cash, it would become reasonable, ostracize its “military 
wing,” and cease its lynching and vigilantism.

When some tried to explain that Wars 1-3 (1947, 1956, 1967) had nothing to do 
with the West Bank, such bothersome details fell on deaf ears.

When it was pointed out that Germans were not blowing up Poles to get back lost 
parts of East Prussia nor were Tibetans sending suicide bombers into Chinese 
cities to recover their country, such analogies were caricatured.

When the call for a “Right of Return” was making the rounds, few cared to 
listen that over a half-million forgotten Jews had been cleansed from Syria, 
Iraq, and Egypt, and lost billions in property.

When the U.N. and the EU talked about “refugee camps,” none asked why for a 
half-century the Arab world could not build decent housing for its victimized 
brethren, or why 1 million Arabs voted in Israel, but not one freely in any 
Arab country.

The security fence became “The Wall,” and evoked slurs that it was analogous to 
barriers in Korea or Berlin that more often kept people in than out. Few 
wondered why Arabs who wished to destroy Israel would mind not being able to 
live or visit Israel.

In any case, anti-Semitism, oil, fear of terrorism — all that and more fooled 
us into believing that Israel’s problems were confined to Israel. So we ended 
up with a utopian Europe favoring a pre-modern, terrorist-run, Palestinian 
thugocracy over the liberal democracy in Israel. The Jews, it was thought, 
stirred up a hornet’s nest, and so let them get stung on their own.

We in the United States preened that we were the “honest broker.” After the 
Camp David accords we tried to be an intermediary to both sides, ignoring that 
one party had created a liberal and democratic society, while the other 
remained under the thrall of a tribal gang.

Billions of dollars poured into frontline states like Jordan and Egypt. Arafat 
himself got tens of millions, though none of it ever seemed to show up in good 
housing, roads, or power plants for his people. The terror continued, enhanced 
rather than arrested, by Western largess and Israeli concessions.

Then the Islamists declared war on the United States. A quarter century of mass 
murdering of Americans followed in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, East Africa, the 
first effort to topple the World Trade Center, and the attack on the USS Cole.

We gave billions to Jordan, the Palestinians, and the Egyptians. Afghanistan 
was saved from the Soviets through U.S. aid. Kuwait was restored after Saddam’s 
annexation, and the holocaust of Bosnians and Kosovars halted by the American 
Air Force. Americans welcomed thousands of Arabs to our shores and allowed 
hundreds of madrassas and mosques to preach zealotry, anti-Semitism, and jihad 
without much scrutiny.

Then came September 11 and the almost instant canonization of bin Laden.

Suddenly, the prior cheap shots at Israel under siege weren’t so cheap. It 
proved easy to castigate Israelis who went into Jenin, but not so when we 
needed to do the same in Fallujah.

It was easy to slander the Israelis’ scrutiny of Arabs in their midst, but then 
suddenly a few residents in our own country were found to be engaging in bomb 
making, taking up jihadist pilgrimages to Afghanistan, and mapping out 
terrorist operations.

Apparently, the hatred of radical Islam was not just predicated on the 
“occupation” of the West Bank. Instead it involved the pretexts of Americans 
protecting Saudi Arabia from another Iraqi attack, the United Nations boycott 
of Iraq, the removal of the Taliban and Saddam, and always as well as the 
Crusades and the Reconquista.

But Europe was supposedly different. Unlike the United States, it was correct 
on the Middle East, and disarmed after the Cold War. Indeed, the European Union 
was pacifistic, socialist, and guilt-ridden about former colonialism.

Hundreds of thousands of Muslims were left alone in unassimilated European 
ghettoes and allowed to preach or promulgate any particular hatred of the day 
they wished. Conspire to kill a Salmon Rushdie, talk of liquidating the “apes 
and pigs,” distribute Mein Kampf and the Protocols, or plot in the cities of 
France and Germany to blow up the Pentagon and the World Trade Center — all 
that was about things “over there” and in a strange way was thought to ensure 
that Europe got a pass at home.

But the trump card was always triangulation against the United States. Most 
recently anti-Americanism was good street theater in Rome, Paris, London, and 
the capitals of the “good” West.

But then came Madrid — and the disturbing fact that after the shameful 
appeasement of its withdrawal from Iraq, further plots were hatched against 
Spanish justices and passenger trains.

Surely a Holland would be exempt — Holland of wide-open Amsterdam fame where 
anything goes and Muslim radicals could hate in peace. Then came the butchering 
of Theo Van Gogh and the death threats against parliamentarian Hirsi Ali — and 
always defiance and promises of more to come rather than apologies for their 
hatred.

Yet was not Britain different? After all, its capital was dubbed Londonistan 
for its hospitality to Muslims across the globe. Radical imams openly preached 
jihad against the United States to their flock as thanks for being given 
generous welfare subsidies from her majesty’s government. But it was the United 
States, not liberal Britain, that evoked such understandable hatred.

But now?

After Holland, Madrid, and London, European operatives go to Israel not to 
harangue Jews about the West Bank, but to receive tips about preventing suicide 
bombings. And the cowboy Patriot Act to now-panicked European parliaments 
perhaps seems not so illiberal after all.

So it is was becoming clear that butchery by radical Muslims in Bali, Darfur, 
Iraq, the Philippines Thailand, Turkey, Tunisia, and Iraq was not so tied to 
particular and “understandable” Islamic grievances.

Perhaps the jihadist killing was not over the West Bank or U.S. hegemony after 
all, but rather symptoms of a global pathology of young male Islamic radicals 
blaming all others for their own self-inflicted miseries, convinced that 
attacks on the infidel would win political concessions, restore pride, and 
prove to Israelis, Europeans, Americans — and about everybody else on the globe 
— that Middle Eastern warriors were full of confidence and pride after all.

Meanwhile an odd thing happened. It turns out that the jihadists were cowards 
and bullies, and thus selective in their targets of hatred. A billion Chinese 
were left alone by radical Islam — even though the Chinese were secularists and 
mostly godless, as well as ruthless to their own Uighur Muslim minorities. Had 
bin Laden issued a fatwa against Beijing and slammed an airliner into a 
skyscraper in Shanghai, there is no telling what a nuclear China might have 
done.

India too got mostly a pass, other than the occasional murdering by Pakistani 
zealots. Yet India makes no effort to apologize to Muslims. When extremists 
occasionally riot and kill, they usually cease quickly before the response of a 
much more unpredictable angry populace.

What can we learn from all this?

Jihadists hardly target particular countries for their “unfair” foreign 
policies, since nations on five continents suffer jihadist attacks and thus all 
apparently must embrace an unfair foreign policy of some sort.

Typical after the London bombing is the ubiquitous Muslim spokesman who when 
asked to condemn terrorism, starts out by deploring such killing, assuring that 
it has nothing to do with Islam, yet then ending by inserting the infamous 
“but” — as he closes with references about the West Bank, Israel, and all sorts 
of mitigating factors. Almost no secular Middle Easterners or religious 
officials write or state flatly, “Islamic terrorism is murder, pure and simple 
evil. End of story, no ifs or buts about it.”

Second, thinking that the jihadists will target only Israel eventually leads to 
emboldened attacks on the United States. Assuming America is the only target 
assures terrorism against Europe. Civilizations will either hang separately or 
triumph over barbarism together. It is that simple — and past time for Europe 
and the United States to rediscover their common heritage and shared aims in 
eradicating this plague of Islamic fascism.

Third, Islamicists are selective in their attacks and hatred. So far global 
jihad avoids two billion Indians and Chinese, despite the fact that their 
countries are far tougher on Muslims than is the United States or Europe. In 
other words, the Islamicists target those whom they think they can intimidate 
and blackmail.

Unfettered immigration, billions in cash grants to Arab autocracies, alliances 
of convenience with dictatorships, triangulation with Middle Eastern patrons of 
terror, blaming the Jews — civilization has tried all that.

It is time to relearn the lessons from the Cold War, when we saw millions of 
noble Poles, Romanians, Hungarians, and Czechs as enslaved under autocracy and 
a hateful ideology, and in need of democracy before they could confront the 
Communist terror in their midst.

But until the Wall fell, we did not send billions in aid to their Eastern 
European dictatorships nor travel freely to Prague or Warsaw nor admit millions 
of Communist-ruled Bulgarians and Albanians onto our shores.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
<font face=arial size=-1><a 
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h62h1eq/M=362335.6886444.7839734.2575449/D=groups/S=1705796846:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1122915542/A=2894362/R=0/SIG=138c78jl6/*http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/arts_culture/?source=YAHOO&cmpgn=GRP&RTP=http://groups.yahoo.com/";>What
 would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?Donate or volunteer 
in the arts today at Network for Good</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

--
This is ZESTGlobal. Post articles on international affairs to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTGlobal by sending a blank 
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/join/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to