Preface 1:  Assessing American Policy. A Year After Obama’s Visit To Cairo

 America and the manufacturing of a Jinni

Would modifying the American Strategy save it from the effects of manufacturing a Jinni?

 Before modifying the American strategy:

1-                  It is easy to transform a friendly ally into an enemy.

 At the end of World War II, The world was split into two camps. After the annihilation of the Axis powers and the dominance of the Allies, the Allies camp itself split further into two camps, The Warsaw pact and the NATO pact. Due to the nuclear deterrence, the conflict between the U.S. and the Soviet Union was centered primarily on the cold war, in which the U.S. launched against the communist camp, a soft ideological war utilizing radio broadcasts, artistic dramas and printed materials. With the advancements in communications and transportations means and devices, this ideological warfare penetrated the depth of the soviet citizen imprisoned behind the iron curtain. It portrayed a robust, bright, dreamy free capitalist world in contrast with his dreary, deprived and repressive reality he was under. At the same time, the U.S. exhausted the Soviet Union with an armament race that sapped its resources, diverting it from basic needs of its citizenry, eventually losing the ability to keep pace. Additionally, the culture of freedom and human rights made the Soviet Union a dinosaur living out of its times, hence its and its satellites’ collapse without a single shot being fired, with the NATO Alliance as the only remaining power on the international arena, in wait for the emergence of a new threat to the new world order. Fearing such a threat, which could be a unified Europe or a Japan, allied with China, thereby reviving the Eastern camp, it was imperative for the U.S. to manufacture this enemy, preferably easy to triumph over, and easy to unify the new world order against. The U.S. found the Muslim World to make an enemy of replacing the old Soviet System.

2-                  By doing so, The U.S. did not realize that it had created a Jinni for itself.

Many contributing factors led to the successful creation of this Jinni. One of which is the traditional animosity towards the colonial West held by the two most popular and widespread trends in both, the Arab and Islamic worlds, the Nationalists and the Religious Salafi (The Muslim Brotherhood and the Wahhabis), coupled with the siding of the West- Especially the U.S.-with Israel. Also, the oppressive regimes allied to the West, directing its populace’s animosity and hatred towards Israel and the U.S., spreading and circulating the myth that the West is conspiring against Arabs and Muslims. Yet, the most prominent factor, is the Islamic Republic of Iran, who is raising the banner of war against the U.S. and Israel, to hide its nationalistic and sectarian goals, of controlling the oil in the Gulf area and to assume leadership of the Sunni World and to revive the Khosrauite Persian Empire.

Those factors helped Iran in formulating an (Islamic) camp facing the American one, which is leading the world community, sometimes accompanied by the United Nations and its 7^th clause of its charter. From Afghanistan, the war started with the September 11^th. attack and the U.S. answered through Afghanistan then Iraq. Ten years later, it became evident that defeat is certain for the U.S. and its allies, because it did not create a traditional enemy in a traditional camp; rather it created a Jinni with all the connotations of such a word.

3-Few factors contributed to the American miscalculations:

     A-America does not posses England’s expertise in dealing with the Islamic World. America, despite its power, is but 3 centuries young, most of which was spent isolated from the outside world, before and after the Monroe doctrine. It entered the world arena during WWI. American experts, with their superficial outlook towards the Islamic World, thought that it was living a (civilizational) backwardness that would last for centuries, and that backwardness would render them a defeated enemy. War would be a profitable market for American and Western arms, a ready field to test its new weaponry, and to sell it its outdated ones. America would invade and impose its will upon it as it pleases. It would enjoy this hegemony over the Islamic World for few centuries until they catch up with (civilizational) maturity.

     B-It looked at the Islamic World through its defeat by Israel. There is no comparison between Israel’s population and the population of the Arab World, much less with the Islamic World, so what gives? The mistake in the perception here is that Israel did not defeat the Islamic World, not the Arab World, not even the Egyptians; it only defeated oppressive militarized regimes that indulged in politics, thereby forgetting the art of war, besides it is regimes at odds with its population, which (those regimes) need Israel to maintain its role in (riding) its people.

     C- America confused Arab and Muslim people with their oppressive rulers, thinking that it was dealing with a billion and a half Muslims, in reality it was the 30 or so despot that it was dealing with, most of, if not all of them are cronies of America doing its bidding. When America was forced to deal with a few thousands of Arab and Muslim people (represented by Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations), it found itself, with all its military might, fighting unseen ghost, not knowing when they strike, when they appear and where they disappear. The question is, what if a billion of those Muslims turned into ghosts?

     D- It is true there is a gap, civilization wise, between Islam and the West, between Israel and the Arabs, but it is a temporary transitory gap, created by regional oppression that would not last except by maintaining the state of backwardness. That state could not survive for long, due to current factors, which are modern cultural influences, which are destined to triumph, (culture of democracy, human rights, the spread of technology and the transformation of the world to become a global village, in which time and distance are reduced to nonexistence). Also, for historical reasons, for the Muslims of today are the descendants of Muslims of yesteryears, leaders of civilization in medieval period, from whom Europe acquired its knowledge. They will not start from Zero (for they were the ones who invented it), did we forget that human civilization originated in Iraq and Egypt, lasting for tens of centuries before moving to Greece?

    E-The U.S. looked at the Muslim World while comparing it to the Soviet Union, thinking that if the former Soviet Union’s nuclear capability was a deterrent for America from attacking, then it was a different case with the backward Muslim World, which was banned from entering the nuclear club, the outcome was the discovery by the Muslim World of a more potent weapon than a nuclear one, a weapon America could not face with its nuclear arsenal; Suicidal explosion.

     F- America dealt with this new enemy camp (the Muslim Camp) with a confrontational militarized style only. Consequently, based on this erroneous assumption, it sent its troops to fight a wrong battle at a wrong location. It found itself stuck in a quagmire, every time it tried to pull itself out of; it sank deeper in it, for it is fighting militarily in an arena that better suited for an ideological warfare. It is impossible for tanks, warplanes and missiles to chase religious concepts out of the mind of a youngster, poised for a bright future, yet hell bent on racing to blow himself up to get into paradise and enjoy the company of those un-betrothed virgins. How is it possible for that American weaponry to learn or know the inward thoughts and feelings of others, and to distinguish between a friend and a foe? That is why an American tank in the streets of Iraq stands still, confused and puzzled, if it were to fire, it might kill innocent people, even some who support it among the Iraqis, and if it stopped, destruction befalls it from all directions.

(Worthy note to those interested, one of the numerous differences between ideological and military wars, is that the objective of the military one is to physically annihilate its opponent, whereas the ideological one’s objective is to save and preserve its adversary, because in this war, the real enemy are the ideas and thoughts dominating his mind, and by convincing and persuading him with what is right and true, he transforms from enemy to friend…).

4-By miscalculating, America jeopardized its position in many ways:

A-Your supposed enemy within the confines of the battle field is unidentifiable, meaning he is a Jinni or a ghost. You could expect a blow from any location…your enemy could be the closest to you…your closest Muslim supporter could turn against you in no time to become an explosive device…(exactly as it is taking place now).

B-The supposed enemy is not confined to the battlefield or to Muslim lands, now it extends to the depth of America and Europe, embedded among American and European Muslims, with their antagonistic propaganda and ideology, they become a fifth column transferring the war to American soil, as it is happening now.

C-The ease by which to acquire or to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, from primitive nuclear, to chemical and bacterial devices, and since it is lawful, in the fundamental Salafi ( in its Wahhabi Sunni or Iranian Shiite components) doctrine to kill civilian opponents, the destruction of Western and American major cities becomes a declared target, pursued by all opposing groups, a possibility that American authorities take every precautionary measure to prevent.( The likelihood of it taking place in the near future is very possible).

D-The terrorism camp is ready with its convincing argument ;( America is the one, who came here with its armies, invading our country, killing hundreds of thousands of our innocent relatives, and if it is said they were mistaken casualties, the ready reply would be: who brought here in the first place?)

E-The near future would bring even a greater threat; the exploding Muslim population. For, as the White population of Europe and America is on the decline, the Muslim population in Asia and Africa is bursting at the seams, their influx to the West is on the increase, carrying with them, their hatred for Judeo-Christian West. Within few decades, Islam would increase its folds, and Muslims would become the majority. If this majority bears animosity towards Christianity, Judaism and the West, then there are massacres awaiting future white generations in America, Europe and Israel. It is the current American and Israeli policies which, through the use of its weaponry, is writing down all the justifications to be used in the near future, say by the middle of this century, by Muslim Extremists, in explaining, theorizing and implementing the massacres intended for future innocent white generations, who as a minority will paying the price for current American and Israeli policies carried out in our times.

5-(Continuity) is one of the main differences between ideological and militarywars

Military warfare uses devices that become obsolete as the war winds down. Its aftereffects remain vivid in the psyche carrying hatred, animosity and burning desire for revenge. Warplanes drop its loads; tanks fire its ammunitions, bullets, rockets, bombs, warplanes, tanks and all military hardware end up as rubble, what remains is the victims’ hatred and the desire for revenge. Pictures of dead and injured, demolished homes atop its inhabitants’ bodies are being recorded, documented and circulated in our times. It is being preserved forever. Its continuous display renews the victims’ painful cries, agitating the emotions for vengeance from one generation to another…..For weapons are not permanent….their effects are …they remain bloody and full of hatred.

It is different with ideological wars…when won…its weapons are continuous…permanency is some of its aftereffects.

Means of ideological war are permanent. It comprises letters and pictures within an article, a research paper or a book. It could be a documentary film, a drama or a television program. Most of traditional Sunni books about Hadith and Jurisprudence were written and recorded during the Abbasid period, about 12 centuries earlier, yet with its wide printing and wide circulation is considered the most valuable ammunition for extremists in their war of ideas against Christians, Jews and the West.

The impact of these (weapons) is permanent, be it in waging war as with the Sunni tradition, or in waging peace, calling for justice and freedom as in the case of  the Quranists tradition, in their peaceful reformative approach inspired by lofty Islamic values of freedom, justice, peace, benevolence, tolerance and compassion.

6-The strange thing is that America has tried both approaches in its war with Japan, armed warfare in its worst and ugliest form, and the ideological war in its most brilliant form. America committed its nuclear massacre in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, right afterwards, Japan fell under American occupation, and America atoned for its misdeeds by waging a war of ideas. Through that, Japan got rid of its chauvinistic, racist culture of war (The Samurai), the culture of imperial despotism, Emperor’s adoration, establishing instead, the culture of peace, freedom and democracy. Consequently, Japan rose to become one of the mightiest economical and industrial powerhouses in the world and the greatest friend for America….thereby forgetting and forgiving the twin massacres of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 Is it possible for America to employ war of ideas to reform Muslims and to confront the culture of terrorism from within Islam?

 That’s what was ignored by the New American Strategy formulated by president Obama,  a year after he addressed the Muslim World from Cairo.

 Finally:

             This New American strategy is insufficient, though it does not consider the Muslim world as an enemy, rather the terrorists only. It lacks a clear stipulation indicating adoption of war of ideas as a tool in interacting with the Muslim World. War of ideas absolutely does not mean animosity to Muslims; on the contrary, it means rescuing Muslims through political, educational, social and religious reforms, from within Islam, confronting religious extremism by showing its contradiction to Islam.

Last note, please do not forget that Muslim victims of  extremism, religious and otherwise, by far exceeds many folds, Non Muslim victims.