Historical Roots and Islamofascism

The moderate Muslims – assuming there are some – continue to assure the West that Islamofascism is not based on Islam but is a perverted form of it – a cult—based on radical ideologies more akin to Bolshevism and the Nazi Socialists than Islam. This cult like figure known as Osama bin Laden has created a fantasy world that rejects all of modernity, a reactionary who clearly wants to be the Caliph of a seventh century realm. In reality Osama bin Laden is much closer in outlook to the Unabomber than he is to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia or any other Muslim head of state. His fantasy world is wrapped up in the trappings of Islam and his goals are to overthrow all secular governments – including Muslim ones – and to install an all powerful Caliphate over the entire world or what is left of it after they destroy Christendom. However, while Osama bin Laden is living in a fantasy world much of the Islamic world isn’t far behind. They intend to stamp out the only democratic government – Israel, that has a sound economy and a non-authoritarian government. To date their success in this unrealistic endeavor has been rather pathetic. The history of the Islamic World shows that it is not only trapped in its tribal culture but that their internecine battles have made them impotent relative to Israel and centuries behind everybody else. It is this lack of unity, their tribal culture, and their irrational behavior toward Jews and Israel that has left the Islamic World in poverty and squalor – enter the Ottomans—just as anti-Semitic but much more successful.

The Ottoman Empire ruled the Islamic World for four hundred years and during that time there was no Renaissance, no Reformation, no Industrial Revolution, and in fact there was no real improvement in medicine, hygiene, or public health, instead there was a long slow and inexorable decline. The Ottomans were ruthless conquerors of the Islamic Empire created by Saladin, and they crushed any opposition. They liked the quiet life and they maintained it. They did not subscribe to capitalism, socialism, Marxism, representative government, or any of the trendy western political philosophies. They avoided all of these intellectual fads of the West but once the Ottoman Empire fell and was partitioned up by the Western Powers in 1917 the carnage began. The first blunder of the West and the one that continues even today is that the Muslims are desperate for a western style democracy but nothing could be further from the truth. The Ottomans unlike the western powers never allowed anyone to think that they would provide freedom of any kind or any kind of wealth instead they kept everyone in line with ruthless efficiency. They did this by maintaining strict control over the religious leaders and any rabble rouser was either eliminated or exiled. A historical lesson ignored by their successors who should never have allowed Ayatollah Khomeini or al Sadr or any of these radical Islamic clergy into any Islamic country. Of course this is outright oppression and dictatorship, which makes the liberals in the west very queasy but authoritarian governments seem to be the only ones that are successful today just as they have been in the past. It is the misguided policies and philosophies of the West that have laid the groundwork for the Islamofascists that plague us today. And yes the radical Muslim clergy is a problem but not the only problem – enter Yasser Arafat – a man more accurately described the destroyer of Arabic cause or gang leader. Awarding this man the Nobel Peace Prize was a travesty but representative of the ability of the West to ignore facts in favor of their wishful thinking.

Perhaps the first thing to remember is that until 1947 Palestinians were Jews, not Arabs. When the state of Israel was established the Jews became Israeli’s and the Arabs ceased being Arabs and became Palestinians except for those who remained Arabs – it is all very confusing. The New Palestinians became “refugees” and have remained in self-inflicted limbo ever since. These refugees formed the power base for Yasser Arafat who led the Palestinians for forty years and led them into one disaster after another with flags flying and drums beating. The only person to gain from his leadership was Arafat himself and everyone else suffered. He initially described the PLO as a Marxist Socialist Revolutionary movement which gave him support from the USSR, but that was never his true leanings. He actually was a member of the semi—secret Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1920”s and has been dedicated to the extermination of the Jews ever since. The Muslim Brotherhood supported Hitler and have practiced assassination and disinformation ever since in their drive to eradicate Jews.

Most of the Arab leaders hated Arafat and distrusted him – which is saying a great deal in a society not noted for its truthfulness. Arafat was a poor administrator and even worse organizer and was generally viewed by his “allies” as little more than a gang leader who was a master of the shakedown – an art he practiced with great result on America, the Saudi’s, and Gulf States. The fact is that Arafat was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and the failure by any Arab leader to support him and his causes opened them to political unrest stirred up by Arafat or worse their assassination by his Fatah thugs. Perhaps the greatest irony here is that when the USSR imploded and their secret files became available photographs were discovered that had been taken by the Romanian Secret Police. These photos – taken at different times – showed that Arafat was a homosexual who cavorted with his body guards. This information has been available since the Reagan Administration but no one ever used that information to leverage Arafat. Considering the attitude of the Arabs and Islam in general, this would have been a substantial lever, but blackmail is such a dirty word.

Arafat seemed to be a compulsive liar and he certainly was corrupt. Much – if not most – of the aid money flowing into his hands was siphoned off into Swiss Bank Accounts. Much of this money was then used for arms which killed thousands of Israeli’s as well as maintaining his “bride of convenience” in Parisian splendor. Even though he demanded and got concessions from just about everyone it was never enough. He was in the terror business and it was a business he liked. The reality is that he led the Palestinians into one defeat after another and has left the Palestinians worse off. After billions of dollars have been sent to the Palestinians they lack an economy, have dismal medical facilities, have no schools other than the ridiculous Madrassa’s, they have no electric generation capability, and in general there is rampant unemployment and unhappiness in an area maintained by armed gangs. The more Arafat and his Fatah gang attacked the Israeli’s the stronger they got, the weaker the PLO got and the more discredited thier cause became, ultimately resulting in the Hama’s coup. Arafat was a murderer and a disaster for the Arabs and Palestinians.

The current policy of the West is doomed to failure as it always has been because the Western States are convinced that the Islamic States are desperate for Western democracy. Both the Clinton and Bush administrations have described Iraq and Syria as “failed states” without regard to the historical facts. While it is true both of these countries could not be described as bastions of liberty, they were stable and yes it is true that both Saddam and Assad have murdered thousands of their citizens in their determination to maintain power, have the western powers done any better? Are things more or less stable? Does democracy work or not? Unfortunately, the bet is that once West leaves Iraq another general will arise and overthrow the government and things will go back to what they were.

Middle East Policies

Recently we were treated to one of the most idiotic speeches by President Bush that he has delivered in his presidency and that is going some. Once again he mounted his horse and promised to bring “democracy” to the Middle East as if these people were longing for a representative government and the freedoms enjoyed in the West. The fact that he actually delivered this speech rests entirely on his shoulders but ultimately it is the fault of the State Department. The State Department has been monopolized by the East Coast intelligentsia practically since its inception and in sprite of the highly vaunted quality of education delivered by the Ivy League their alumni have never been strong on history – especially history of the Middle East. It’s as if the Ottoman Empire never existed.

Virtually all of the current Islamic States were ruled by the Ottomans for 400 years. During this period there was no Renaissance, no Reformation, no Industrial Revolution, or steady improvement in medicine, hygiene, public health, or education. But the Ottomans maintained peace and order during this entire time because the Ottomans would not tolerate any challenge to their authority and the punishments they inflicted on any challenger were draconian. Then the Ottomans – thanks to the bumbling of Winston Churchill – sided with the Kaiser and their empire was dismantled by the French and British. It has never known a peaceful moment since then. The Western Democracies have never understood nor even attempted to understand the people or their motivations in the Middle East. Instead the drive has been to westernize them and to create freely elected democratic governments that were independent of the Mosque. This policy has consistently failed with the only exception being Turkey but that was reformed from within by Kemal Attaturk and was not accomplished by the Western Powers. This failed policy of westernization continues today as is evidenced by President Bush’s speech and the American Foreign Policy relative to Iraq.

The British and French and now the Americans arrogantly assume that because the Islamic States are consistently mired in poverty, ignorance, and squalor they are desperate to become westernized. Well when the Ottoman Empire was dismantled Iraq was a constitutional monarchy until 1958 when the Army overthrew the monarchy in a very bloody coup. Prior to this coup the “democratic” government conducted genocide against the Assyrians and the Jews. The Shiites were suppressed as well. The brutality of this regime rivaled that of Saddam Hussein and it was all done under a democratic government, but not one where all were created equal or given equal protection under the law. All of this is on the historical record – a record our State Department and all of those Alumni from all of those fancy colleges seem to have neglected to read. The liberal media as well as all of those well meaning politicians had assumed that the Iraqi’s were longing for a democratic government, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, an independent judiciary, and an elected parliament. What they neglected to consider was what happened when the British introduced those democratic institutions in 1920, which was exactly what happened after the Bush Administration re-introduced them in 2005. What happened then is what is happening now – civil war, massacres, and an unreliable military that merrily participates in the internecine warfare. This is the background that permeates the Middle East and it is against this background that President Bush calls for the installation of democratically elected western style governments. The fallacy of this policy is obvious or should be obvious and certainly the various Sheiks, Emirs, Monarchs, and Presidents for Life know that this is not in their best interest.

Governments throughout the Middle East are dictatorships, monarchies, or some similar absolutist government and all of them are driven by Islam no matter how secular they may appear. While Iran and Egypt are ancient countries the rest are artificial creations of the west. The separation of church and state so common in the west is unheard of in the world of Islam where governments are subservient to the religious leaders and no where is this more apparent than in Iran and Iraq today. The time has long past for America and the Western powers to cease their insistence that the Middle East adopt western values and conduct themselves and their affairs along western lines. There is no history of democratic governments or even processes in these countries and those governments that are stable are authoritarian.

This is not a call for America to establish a military government similar to what was done in Japan in 1945. It is too late for that but this constant drumbeat for the creation of freely elected governments must cease. The more America, the western media, and the liberal establishment press for this unrealistic objective the more idiotic we seem and the harder it is for our friends in the area – and there are some – to take us seriously. Our foreign policy needs to be revamped to accept the reality that many of these countries were better off under the absolute authority of the Ottomans. It should seem apparent to any educated westerner that the Islamic countries have no desire to become westernized or democracies. They were happy in the seventh century and they were happy under the Ottomans, but the west wanted their oil and in order to get it they felt it was necessary to modernize the Middle East. This modernization has been resisted by Islam for 500 years and is resisting now, unfortunately Pandora’s Box was opened with the fall of the Ottomans and now we are left with result and no solution in sight.