Introduction

The purpose of this article is to suggest a method to resolve several very serious international problems with one comprehensive solution. The proposed solution is, at the moment, politically incorrect but ideas of this nature must begin incubating in the public mind in order to eventually make them thinkable, practical and achievable.

Solutions to major problems that have stymied the "experts" may be found by a method known as "thinking out of the box," i.e., thinking in an unorthodox manner. The proposed resolution is based on this method and is primarily built on the assumption that regional problems can only be resolved by regional solutions. This means that the proposed concept involves relocation of populations, regimes and, to some extent, reassignment of territorial sovereignty. All these concepts, which seem radical at first glance, are based on historical precedents, particularly during the last century.

Many of the proposed concepts, although accomplished in the past with positive results, have been victims of prejudice and double standards, influenced by the political leanings of those making judgment. For example, the idea of transfer of populations in order to eliminate friction and save lives was employed by the British with international approval when, in 1947, the Indian subcontinent was divided into two states, Hindu India and Moslem Pakistan. Earlier, in 1922 the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Fridtjof Nansen for conceiving and implementing the plan to transfer Turks and Greeks to avoid further bloodshed at the conclusion of the Greek Turkish War. Today, liberal circles in Israel are proposing transfer of Jews from settlements in Judea and Samaria to areas like Israel's Negev while, at the same time, vigorously opposing transfer of Arabs which they define as ethnic cleansing. So, a double standard has been employed - one man's transfer is the other man's ethnic cleansing. This author asks the reader to keep an open mind until the entire thesis is presented.

In order to understand the proposed resolution, it is first necessary to take note of some basic facts and realities. Only when all these are clearly understood can the practicality of the proposed solution be comprehended. The following sections are not exhaustive; they do not completely describe the phenomena discussed. The purpose is to present twelve basic facts as briefly and broadly as possible to provide background. I have quoted a limited number of sources in order to provide a basis for the reader to delve further while, at the same time, not converting this article into an academic dissertation.
 

Fact No.1 The war between Islam and other civilizations

In 1993, Samuel P. Huntington introduced the concept of the "The Clash of Civilizations". His hypothesis is that world politics is entering a new phase and the fundamental source of conflict in the world will be neither primarily ideological nor primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. With the end of the Cold War, international politics moved out of its Western phase, and its centerpiece becomes the interaction between the West and non-Western civilizations and among non-Western civilizations. In the politics of civilizations, the peoples and governments of non-Western civilizations no longer remain the objects of history as targets of Western colonialism but join the West as movers and shapers of history.

Huntington defines the nature of civilizations in terms of cultural identity; that is, common objective elements, such as language, history, religion, customs, institutions, and by the subjective self-identification of people. Differences among civilizations are not only real, they are basic. And the most important difference is religion. These differences are the product of centuries and they are more fundamental and lasting than differences among political philosophies and political regimes. In much of the world, religion has moved in to fill the gap caused by the weakening of the nation-state as a source of identity. The revival of religion provides the basis of identity and commitment that transcends national boundaries and unites civilizations. The West, which is now at the peak of its power, confronts non-Western civilizations that increasingly have the desire, the will, and the resources to shape the world in non-Western Ways.

Huntington defines seven or eight major civilizations; these include Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African. He hypothesizes that there is already evidence that future conflicts will occur along the cultural fault lines separating civilizations. Among the many examples he cites are the turbulent Balkans where the fault line runs between Christianity (Protestant and Roman Catholic) to the north and west, and Orthodox Christianity and Moslem to the south and east.

Without going into the precise details of the Huntington thesis, there are several very important aspects of his theory that are immediately pertinent to the problems addressed by this paper.

First, the perception of the civilizational conflict is different between the West and the others. Western concepts differ fundamentally from those prevalent in other civilizations. Western ideas of individualism, liberalism, constitutionalism, human rights, equality, liberty, the rule of law, democracy, free markets, the separation of church and state, have little support in other civilizations. The attempts by the West to propagate these ideas has produced a reaction against "human rights imperialism." Most important, the very notion that there could be a "universal civilization" is a Western idea that is in direct opposition to the particularism of other societies. The United States and other Western powers have attempted to induce other peoples to adopt Western ideas concerning democracy and human rights. Modern democratic government originated in the West and when it has developed to any extent in non-Western societies it has usually been the product of Western colonialism and imposition. It is not endemic to non-Western societies. Unfortunately the West does not see it this way. To put it simply, the West, particularly the United States, does not realize that "the Middle East is not the Middle West."

Second, the most violent conflict between civilizations is taking place along the crescent shaped Islamic bloc of nations from the bulge of Africa to Central Asia. Violence occurs between Moslems on one hand, and Orthodox Serbs in the Balkans, Jews in Israel, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Burma and Catholics in the Philippines. Islam, in the words of Huntington, has bloody borders.

Conflict along the fault line between Western and Islamic civilizations has been going on for 1300 years. Beginning with the Arab surge west and north in the eighth century through the Crusader attempt to bring Christianity to the Holy Land, the Ottoman Turk expansion from the 14th through the 17th century, the ascent of the Western powers in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the retreat of the West after World War II, and the rise of Arab nationalism followed by Islamic fundamentalism. One of the bizarre results of the heavy dependence of the West on Arab oil during the 20th century was the opportunity for the oil rich Moslem countries to become money-rich and, when they wished to, weapons-rich. According to Huntington, the centuries-old military interaction between the West and Islam is unlikely to decline and it could become more virulent (this was written in 1993!). On both sides, the interaction between Islam and the West is seen as a clash of civilizations. "The West's next confrontation, according to M.J.Akbar, an Indian Moslem author, is definitely going to come from the Moslem world. It is in the sweep of the Islamic nations from the Maghreb to Pakistan that the struggle for a new world order will begin." According to Bernard Lewis "We are facing a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilizations - the perhaps irrational but surely historic reaction of an ancient rival against our Judeo-Christian heritage, our secular present, and the world wide expansion of both."

Although historically the clash of civilizations has taken place along the civilizational fault lines, the advent of modern technology has changed the picture irreversibly. The most violent, sobering, traumatic and not to be ignored Islamic attack upon the United States and what it represents did not occur in some far-off island or continent. It took place in the heart of New York, Washington and Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. The audaciousness and character of that attack means that the West is in a struggle for its very existence.

The conflict between Islam and the West is further complicated by the fact that there has been a huge influx of Moslem immigrants to the West since World War II, especially to Europe but also significantly to the United States. In France and Germany, immigrant and locally born Moslems are a non-negligible percentage of the voting population. In France, for example, there are an estimated 6 million Moslems, which is a large voting bloc (more than ten times the number of Jews). In the United States, because of the character of the election system (the electoral college), there are a growing number of states wherein the politicians must cater to the wishes of the Moslem electorate. This has profound effect upon foreign policy of the Western nations particularly since it is the rare politician who will make the morally proper decision when confronted with the choice between pandering to the source of his votes and promoting the long range national interest. Politicians have trouble seeing beyond the next public opinion poll, and cannot see anything at all beyond the next election.

The large Moslem population in the western democracies represents another threat, that of the existence of a dangerous fifth column - citizens and residents who actively identify with ideologies and actively support factions that are in direct conflict with the interests of the countries in which they live.

It should be noted that there are other theories that differ somewhat in degree or modify the thesis of Huntington. These include such theoreticians as Barry Buzan, Daniel Pipes, Martin Kramer, Peter Rodman and others. Suffice it to say that a decade has passed since Huntington's theory was first proposed, and the accumulated data indicates that he was quite correct. We are witness to what Charles Krauthammer called "a global intifada." And Krauthammer's remarks were made one and a half years before the Twin Towers fell victim to Islam's attack upon the West.

---------------

 

Basic Fact No.2 ??? Islamic Terror

The civilizational confrontation between Islam and the other civilizations, particularly the West which it perceives as most threatening to itself, is exacerbated by a deadly dimension - Islamic terror.

Islamic terror, a historical phenomenon, took on an additional, threatening aspect in the last decade of the 20th century - institutionalization. Although al-Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist organization, was founded in 1988 by bin-Laden, the establishment in 1998 of the Worldwide Islamic Front for Holy War against the Jews and the Crusaders meant that terrorism had become a problem that recognizes neither borders nor limits of any kind. It appeals to the world's Moslems to kill Americans and their allies everywhere, as a personal duty, and to liberate the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.

Dr. David Bukay writes that "the combination of Arab radicals and fundamentalist Islam constitutes the greatest threat to the existence of modern society." France's leading intellectual, Bernard-Henri Levy, who visited Pakistan to research a book on slain Wall Street reporter Daniel Pearl, returned stunned by the depth and ferocity of radical Islam. He reported to Le Figaro: "Radical Islam is as much to be feared as the Communist and fascist totalitarianisms of yesterday."

It is, to a great extent, more dangerous than communism and fascism which rose and which were defeated during the 20th century because it is found in many states throughout the world and has a population of more than one billion Moslems who are widely distributed geographically. Significantly, it is found in large numbers in modern, industrialized countries. It is more threatening, in combination with states having extremist regimes, and has both the means and powerful motives for purchasing and obtaining weapons of all kinds, conventional and otherwise; its ideology is uncompromisingly murderous and nihilistic. Although serious students of the phenomenon, such as Daniel Pipes, have noted that the fundamentalists are only a minority in Islamic society, the unfortunate fact is that it is this minority that sets the tone. There were less than twenty terrorists involved in the multiple attacks upon the United States in September 2001, supported by a logistic and intelligence network of perhaps thousands, and funded by wealthy Arab regimes, particularly Saudi Arabia.

The fundamentalists believe that many Arab regimes maintain their stability and power due to the presence of western imperialism and its generous assistance. Thus, the fundamentalists have two goals. First, to undermine the foundations of these regimes through terrorist actions against the West in order to drive the West off Islamic soil and to replace the present regimes. The corollary of this method is a war of attrition to wear down the desire of the West to rule and expand. Second, to bring about the collapse of the West and to take its place.

This is not the place for a detailed discussion of the roots, causes, growth and danger of Islamic terrorism. Suffice it to say that, as of 9/11, it is a reality that can no longer be avoided or covered up. It is not at all clear how much the Western world understands the threat and the directions that it may take.

 

>>> Continued in Part 2