Islam, politics, and foreign policy

I don't know a significant amount about Islam. My base of knowledge of Middle Eastern history revolves mostly around the growth of nationalism and secular politics during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. But I do know a few important things: Islam isn't communism and Islam isn't a totalizing force that forces its adherents to follow dictates by crazy, American-hating mullahs or imams. The threat from "Radical Islam" might be true, or it might be wildly exaggerated by people who view Muslims as blind sheep and prone to religious fervor and hatred. For a good example, see the fine folks who produced the dvd Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West. That's not to say that it isn't a national security threat, but how do you wage war on a form of religion? I guess you create silly words like Islamo-Fascism that have mixed or contradictory meanings, at best. You can’t have a new war or cold war against Islam.

In last Sunday's NYT Op-Eds, Nicholas Kristof blasted US policy in Somalia for failing to see that the Islamic Courts Union potentially offered the US government an ally rather than an enemy. The US, from the way it seems now, encouraged Ethiopia to attack, thus re-unleashing hell in Somalia and empowering groups like Shabab (which translates to youth or rejuvenation, according to my Arabic-English dictionary) that sow instability and might assist those linked to Al Qaeda. Kristof taps into a key aspect of misunderstanding by many in the West and policy-makers who apparently see Muslims as partners (willing or unwilling) in a massive Western hating club that aids and abets Al Qaeda and its ilk.

Some of the most relevant and crucial work done by Middle Eastern historians illustrates the process by which Islam is a cultural force for people in the region and across the world. But, as they’ve found and supported, Islam doesn't trump or even guide all forms of social and political economy and interaction. Islam in Indonesia, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Mauritania, and the Netherlands is quite different and should be understood that way. There isn't a codified version of Islam that binds all of its followers and they decide how to vote or speak. And like the rabid fear of communism and the Soviet Union, viewing Islam as Muslims’ sole (and radical) guiding force imposes characteristics of Muslims as opposed to reason and consistently in a war-like setting.

I guess I can’t expect everyone to know the differences between Sunnis and Shias. I would expect President Bush to have understood the difference, which he didn’t seem to know when he questioned “Wait, I thought they were Muslims?” in 2003, according to some observers. Future policy-makers need to realize that it is entirely possible to work with governments and leaders who follow the Islamic faith. Early in the Cold War, American policy-makers missed opportunities by rigidly interpreting communism and communist states as enemies who could not be peeled away from the Soviet Unions’ sphere. (For instance, in the 1940s, Ho Chi Minh wasn’t a guaranteed communist who wanted to murder American boys for the sake of socialism or communism.) Believing that Al Qaeda is an organic creation out of Islam—and thus inseparable from the larger religion—is to neglect ways to silence a national security threat, but also to repair the United States’ image abroad. In other words, they don't all think and act "that way." The US' international political capital is crucial to carrying out any form of diplomacy with Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.