By Barry Rubin
HERZLIYA, Israel –As of today, one can say that the revolution in Syria must be taken seriously. Not only were the demonstrations large but also they had spread to additional parts of the country and involved different religious and ethnic communities.
Of course, there is a big difference between Egypt and Syria. In Egypt, the regime’s thugs beat up people. In Syria, the army openly shoots to kill.
What should be happening? The president of the United States should go on television. He should give a long list of the Syrian regime’s aggressive and terrorist deeds, including the murder of Americans. He should point to the dictatorship’s crimes both at home and abroad. And he should conclude with a stirring call of support for a democratic revolution in Syria.
Sure it’s a risk: but a heck of a lot less risky than what this administration has done in Egypt and Libya, not to mention Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.
The moment has come to help overthrow the regime in Damascus. Yet nobody expects the U.S. government to meet that challenge. Instead, a U.S. government that has no problem trashing an Egyptian government that was an ally for three decades calls the far bloodierand anti-American dictator in Syria, a “reformer.” What a tragedy!
*
Why Do “They” Hate America? Just Listen
Why do people in certain parts of the world hate America? Some think it’s because of U.S. support of Israel or other policies; some because of American values and culture. Well, the main reason is the politics, worldview, history, and self-interest of those involved.
Consider (thanks to MEMRI) an interview with a retired Pakistani Lieutenant-General, Shahid Aziz. Remember that Pakistan is an ally and a recipient of massive U.S. aid. The United States has not intervened in internal Pakistani politics, working with whoever is in power. The United States has even backed Pakistan against India.
And remember that Aziz is no streetcorner revolutionary but a career military officer who has held the highest command and intelligence posts, working closely with Americans including in the war onterror.
So what does he say in an interview with a Pakistani newspaper? (Who cares what these people say to American journalists!)
He accuses the United States of killing hundreds of Pakistanis in attacks against the Taliban and also claims the CIA has created spy networks all over the country that then carried out bloody terrorist attacks pretending that they were done by the Taliban.
In other words, there are no real failures by Pakistan’s own government to provide stability or improve living standards; there is no real revolutionary Islamist threat. It’s all America’s fault. And America is murdering hundreds, even thousands, of Pakistani Muslims.
The environment of Pakistan, Iran, throughout the Arabic-speaking world, and now even in Turkey is full of this kind of thing every day. It comes through the schools, radio, television, newspapers, mosque sermons, statements by government officials, speeches by oppositionists (both “peaceful” groups that run in elections and violent terrorists), and from everywhere else. Day in; day out; every day for decades.
Imagine someone in Pakistan reading this interview. He can well conclude that the United States is waging war on Pakistan and on Islam. This kind of behavior meets the minimum requrements for staging a Jihad: an attack on Muslims and Muslim lands. Thus, under these circumstances, the reader is completely justified in planting a bomb outside the U.S. embassy, cutting the head off an American journalist, or hijacking an airliner and flying it into the World Trade Center.
It is the failure to comprehend such things–and even the failure to be aware of them–that makes the United States (and the West) incapable of responding to the threat. If the three-star general who worked with you and whose salary you (indirectly) paid wants people to murder you then the idea that President Barack Obama is going to win hearts and minds through flattery and concessions is ludicrous.
The West’s big problem is not Islamophobia but the failure to be aware of massive Westophobia, and even to mimic those lies itself.
*
Libya Is To Obama as Iraq Was to Bush
Let’s begin with a quote from a Los Angeles Times story:
“The nascent rebel effort in eastern Libya has begun to fray in the face of chaotic battlefield collapses. For many rebel fighters, the absence of competent military leadership and a tendency to flee at the first shot have contributed to sagging morale. Despite perfunctory V-for-victory signs and cries of “Allahu akbar!” (God is great), the eager volunteers acknowledge that they are in for a long, uphill fight.”
This is what happens when the United States gets involved in a war without knowing what’s going on beforehand. What is the rebels collapse–and the no-fly zone and a few aerial attacks probably wouldn’t prevent that.
Faced with a victory for dictator Muammar al-Qadhafi, the West can either:
A. Accept a defeat, help refugees fleeing into Egypt, admit tens of thousands of Libyans into the United States, and face the consequences of a vengeful Qadhafi or…
B. Escalate, send arms and advisors, perhaps some day combat troops to fight a war in Libya. Oh, and by the way, thanks to recent events neither Egypt nor Tunisia will provide a base of operations for such a war. And any American forces on the ground might be murdered by hardline jihadis on “our” side.
Of course, what’s most likely for a while is Option C: Continue doing what they are doing now and pretending that everything’s going great.
Welcome to Obama’s Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Of course, in Iraq, at least the United States started out with an impressive military victory. While the Bush Administration didn’t fully understand the forces within Iraq and how to deal with them, it had a higher level of information and cooperation than does its successor in Libya.
The U.S. government has committed itself to protect civilians in Libya. If Qadhafi kills civilians does that trigger an all-out U.S. or NATO invasion of Libya? I’m not taking a position on this, just pointing out that it seems as if the Obama Administration never thought about it, and the media isn’t asking this question either!
What happens if the rebels murder civilians? Will the U.S. army attack them?
*
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. GLORIA Center site: http://www.gloria-center.org He may be contacted at barry.rubin@sdjewishworld.com