The US should stop talking evasively about the "war on terror", declares Prof. Daniel Pipes, an American expert on Middle East affairs. It should call the enemy by its name: this is a "war on militant Islam". This is not preaching a religious war, Pipes claims, and calls on the West "Pushing" Islam into isolation
Yossi Melman
Photo: Nir Kidar Pipes. "In the security checks on boarding the planes, which are a joke to me, they confiscate knives and even nail clippers, all so as not to say that the suspects are Muslims"
The treasure trove of images of Prof. Daniel Pipes in his analysis of Islam, takes him away from the realms of the Second World War and the Cold War.
"We need to treat the phenomenon of militant Islam like the Nazis and fight it like the free world fought the Nazis and then Soviet communism - a war on all fronts and by all means."
Pipes, an American expert on Middle East affairs, participated last week in the Herzliya conference, held on behalf of the Interdisciplinary Center. He studied and taught at Harvard University, engaged in research for three years in Egypt, served as a consultant to the United States Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense and authored many books and articles, among others on Iran and Syria.
According to him, the phenomenon and manifestations of militant Islam are not new; Their beginning was in the twenties of the last century, and maybe even earlier. But it was only in February 1979, with the success of the Islamic revolution in Iran, that prominent representatives of the fundamentalist movement succeeded in coming to power in the country for the first time, "and from that moment they launched an attack against the United States and the West." He points to three key events, which happened at the same time in November 1979, as significant The beginning of the attack: the students' takeover of the US embassy in Tehran and taking the staff as hostages hostage, the attack on the US embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan and the attempt to take over the Kaaba complex in Mecca. "They succeeded in Tehran and failed in Islamabad and Mecca, but since then they have been attacking and attacking."
A war with people, not weapons
Pipes has counted hundreds of incidents since and until the attacks of September 11, 2001, in which about 800 Americans were killed around the world, starting with dozens of incidents of the kidnapping of Western hostages in Beirut, through the hijacking of a TVE plane in 1985, also in Beirut, and ending with the attack The terror attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998, in which 224 people were killed Adam. "Unfortunately, all these events were perceived by law enforcement in the US as criminal events, instead of being defined as war." Therefore, there was no change in thinking and there was no attempt to damage the infrastructure of militant Islam.
"Only after September 11 did the American government realize that war had been declared on us." The US returned war when it attacked in Afghanistan and is currently operating in Yemen, the Philippines and other countries. These actions are indeed intended to destroy infrastructure and, according to Pipes, a certain change in policy is also noticeable. This change is manifested, for example, in the establishment of the new Ministry of Homeland Security and in the mobilization of the American Immigration Authority for the fight , which is designed to prevent terrorists from entering the US.
"But", he emphasizes, "all these are not enough". Prof. Pipes would also like to see a change in the definition. "We call the fight the 'war on international terrorism'. It's a meaningless definition. It's like saying a war with guns or a war with ships. All the security arrangements we make are aimed at avoiding addressing the root of the problem. The concept of security is to look for weapons and not the people who possess them. Therefore, for example , in the security checks on boarding planes, which in my view are one big joke, they confiscate knives, pocketknives and even took nail clippers from me, all so as not to say that the suspects They are the Muslims. Although the security arrangements and the immigration authority's approach are aimed at burdening the Muslims, we are afraid to say this. What we are looking for are terrorists and 100% of the terrorists today are Muslims."
Do you want the US to declare war on Islam?
"No. By no means against Islam. Only against militant and radical Islam. The suspect, whether he's Egyptian or Somali or whatever, should be told explicitly, 'It's not because of your nationality but because you're a Muslim militant.' Just like it was sixty years ago year. The world fought the Nazis not because they were Germans, but during the Cold War they fought, although not in a hot war, against the Communists The Soviets, not because they were Russians or other nationalities, but because of their totalitarian ideology. In my opinion, this is the main obstacle facing us."
Pipes believes that the fight today is not only against terrorism and that terrorism is only the symptom of the problem. According to him, "The problem is extreme Islam in all its manifestations. Not only the violent ones; it also has non-violent manifestations. There are groups in the US that operate in non-violent methods, which are just as serious, such as preaching to convert, attempts to influence legislation, propaganda and more."
But these are the rules of the democratic game.
"I am not suggesting that people be arrested without trial, but they should not be given legitimacy. We should not invite to the White House the leaders, religious priests, preachers and preachers of all kinds, those who do not disapprove of violence and terrorism. They must not be given political and social legitimacy."
Pipes emphasizes that his perception does not depart from the starting point of "clash of cultures", which Samuel Huntington wrote about, and that he is not preaching a religious war. "By no means; only for the war against militant Islam. The Muslims themselves are victims. As in the case of Salman Rushdie, as in the murder of Muslims in many parts of the world. Militant Islam is the problem and moderate Islam is the solution."
Do you think militant Muslims have gotten stronger because of the weakness of the West?
"Not because of the weakness of the West, but because of the weakness of the Muslim world. The Muslim world went through three stages. The first was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when it adopted the European liberal national tradition; then it adopted the ideas of socialist totalitarianism and established dictatorial regimes of various kinds, which decorated the themselves in socialism and communism; now the tendency is towards Muslim tyranny and totalitarianism. True That attitude is tempting and the Muslim leaders have difficulty dealing with it. Therefore, because of the weakness of the moderate Muslim leaders, we have to do the work. In both cases we succeeded in destroying fascism and Marxism We must strive for the elimination of Muslim militancy, this should be our goal."
And do you think it can be done?
"We can and we must. Of course, in this struggle we cannot act alone. We need to mobilize moderate Islam to our side. We must help them help themselves. This will only be possible if we push for reforms so that Islam undergoes a process of modernization.
Islam has never gone through a process of modernization, like Christianity and Judaism. As part of such a process, old concepts must be uprooted and given a new meaning."
A new meaning for jihad
According to Pipes, "Slavery is still accepted in some parts of the Muslim world, such as in Sudan or Pakistan. They oppose usury in principle. It is true that an interest rate of 5% per day is a biting interest that must be fought against, but an interest rate of 3% per year is reasonable and even positive. We should give the concept Jihad' a new, up-to-date and appropriate meaning for this, Muslims need new philosophers, modern halachic teachers and other politicians All of this actually means announcing a much more ambitious project than 'just' a war on terror."
There are clear elements of arrogance and lordship in your words, considering we know better what is good for Muslims.
"This is not lordship. This is the order of the hour. As soon as we show our determination and eliminate our real enemy, as we eliminated Nazism and the Soviet Union, we will find allies among the moderate Muslims. This is what is happening in Afghanistan. Who was Hamid Karzai? Who knew him until a year ago? But as soon as we eliminated the Taliban, there were moderate forces in Afghan society who did not have the power to do so. We gave Karzai a chance We won't do it ourselves. We need to understand that we are in a war of ideas. We have military capabilities and explosives.
"To a certain extent, the global situation reminds us of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is a clash of wills. Whoever shows more determination and a stronger will will win. If we delay, the disasters will be even greater. For me, the question is when will we wake up. Will we do it now, right now, or In this respect, the September 11 attacks were a wake-up call, just like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the surprise which landed on the West when it became clear that the Soviets had also obtained a hydrogen bomb."
Published in "Haaretz", 8/12/2002
