The
attack on the U.S. consulate
in Benghazi and the murder of four Americans there has become a huge
issue. There are many stories and rumors that are still being debated
and more information is coming out. What I’m going to try to do here is
to analyze the enduring themes raised by these tragic events.
Why Do They Hate Us?
There
is a debate over the causes of terrorism and
anti-Americanism in the world. One possible view is that the principal
problem is that of genuine conflict. The adversaries hold certain
ideological ideas—say, revolutionary Islamism—to which American society
and policies are antithetical. The collision (as with Communism, Nazism,
and aggressive Japanese militarism in earlier decades) is inevitable.
The United States is inconveniencing the totalitarians both because of
what it does (policies) and because of what it represents (freedom,
democracy, capitalism).
The
other view currently dominates many Western academic “experts,”
politicians, mass media, and even governments. That concept is that the
hatred is our
own fault. We have done things in the past—which require apologies—and
are doing things in the present that makes people angry at America who
otherwise would be friendly.
An
exception is made for a “tiny minority of extremists,” mainly a code
word for al-Qaida, but the more sophisticated argument is that such
people would have no following if America handled things properly.
Thus,
in this case, if American facilities are attacked in Cairo and Benghazi
it must have been something America did wrong, to wit, an insulting
video made by an immigrant from the Middle East about Islam.
Diagnosing
the problem tells one what the cure is: sensitivity; respect;
tightening rules against such insults; bowing and scraping; refusing to
identify radicals and terrorists with Islam in any way; giving large
amounts of money; helping the Muslim Brotherhood so it will be grateful
later; telling the NASA director to make up stuff about Muslim
contributions to space travel, etc.
That is the path the Obama Administration, with major support from the intellectual-cultural establishment, has followed.
Why Do Some of Us Hate Ourselves?
The
answer to this question follows from the first answer. If “we” are
responsible for the hatred and conflict, then we have done
evil and must repent. We are the problem or, as one much-feted American
intellectual put it, the United States is the cancer of the world.
In
the Benghazi case, however, it is hard to come up with more than a
video, according to the dominant view. After all, didn’t the United
States “liberate” Libya from a terrible dictator? Of course, the problem
is that from the standpoint of the radicals, the United States merely
became Libya’s new master, blocking the revolutionary Islamist, Sharia
state they wanted, producing a “puppet” (who cares if it was elected?)
government.
America
is thus the prime enemy not because it did something evil but because
it did something which the U.S. government regarded as good. If they
hate us in Libya for sinful policies, then President Barack Obama, not
the Egyptian-born video producer, is the chief sinner.
-----------------------
We need your support.
To make a tax-deductible donation to the GLORIA Center by PayPal: <https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=ET6RUW2JGHGGW>
By credit card: <http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com> and click Donate button.
Checks: "American Friends of
IDC.” “For GLORIA Center” on memo line.
Mail: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th St., 11th Fl., NY, NY 10003.
For tax-deductible donations in Canada and the UK, write info@gloria-center.org.
Please be subscriber 30,116 (among more than 50,000 total readers). Put email address in upper right-hand box: http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com
------------------------
Is America a Bully or a Leader?
As
noted above, the establishment view today is that America has been a
bully in the past, acting unilaterally and not respecting the views of
others. Obama has said this directly when speaking to foreign—including
Middle Eastern—audiences.
But
how does one stop being a bully? By showing that one isn’t tough,
doesn’t protect one’s interests fiercely. Thus, in the Benghazi case,
the U.S. government
didn’t send the ambassador to Benghazi with Americans to guard him, nor
did the consulate have Americans to provide security. To do so would be
to show disrespect for the Libyans, to act in a way that might be
perceived of as imperialistic.
Similarly,
the president would not call in an airstrike against the attackers or
send an armed rescue team to the consulate because to do so would have
signaled an arrogance and aggressiveness, putting Americans first and
not acting as a citizen of the world.
Who is the Enemy?
If
the enemy is defined as solely al-Qaida this allows a policy of
treating all other Islamists—even the Afghan Taliban!—as a potential
friend. Both Vice-President Biden and Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton, for example, explained that leading elements of the Taliban, a
group complicit in the September 11 attacks, could be won over.
Certainly, the Muslim Brotherhood—the world’s largest and most powerful
international anti-American organization—was helped and treated as a
potential
ally.
Al-Qaida,
however, is a relatively weak organization, capable of staging only
sporadic terror attacks, with the exception perhaps of remote Somalia,
Yemen, Afghanistan, and parts of Pakistan. It cannot take over whole
countries. The fact that Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Turkey, and
perhaps soon Syria are governed by Islamists is a far greater strategic
threat.
Then
why
couldn’t the Obama Administration have said that the consulate was
attacked by evil al-Qaida for no reason other than its lust to murder
Americans, with the perfect symbolism of the attack having been staged
on September 11?
There
was a dual problem. First, the group involved was one the U.S.
government had worked with during the Libyan civil war so it could not
admit they were close to al-Qaida. Second, the official line was that
al-Qaida had been defeated so it could not still be a threat. Therefore,
an alternative narrative and a cover-up were needed.
Competence and Courage
Once
upon a time a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination
warned that if Obama was elected president he would not be reliable in a
crisis, answering a 3 AM phone call requiring instant response. That
claim, of course, came from Hillary Clinton. Benghazi was that phone
call.
That
conclusion is reinforced by the killing of al-Qaida leader Usama bin
Ladin. Notice something of huge importance that has been neglected.
Obama and his supporters bragged about his indecision on the no-brainer
of getting the architect of the September 11 attacks. If he would
hesitate on an obvious call like that one, how would he deal with a
consulate under attack in Benghazi?
There
is, or should be, a sacred trust between the U.S. government and those
who put themselves in harm’s way for the
sake of America. Everything should be done to protect and save them. In
this case, however, the country’s leaders let those people down both
before and during the crisis.
Note,
too, how unintentionally revealingly Obama responded to this issue in
the presidential debate. Once the crisis was over, Obama said, he swung
into action, securing those who still survived, investigating who was
responsible, and promising to punish them.
What
about before and during the multi-hour assault? Silence. The
details--for example, whether or not there was a drone overhead--obscure
the fact that no proper preparations were made for the ambassador and
consulate being unprotected and that passivity prevailed during the
battle.
If
the U.S. government didn’t trust the Libyans wouldn’t that show that
America thought itself superior and its interests to override those of
others? And isn’t that racist?
One
could say that the Obama Administration’s failure to act denotes
incompetence, and there is truth there. But the larger picture is that
it was a failure due to its concept of America and the world. The real
danger is not from totalitarian enemies grown bolder in the fact of
American weakness and a loss of self-confidence. No, according to the
prevailing view, it was rather excessive American self-confidence and
strength in the past.
The
effort to change those bad old ways, to open a new era with completely
different behavior,
the failure to perceive the real enemies and to understand America’s
rights and duties were the causes of the incident in Benghazi, and many
other setbacks as well.
The chickens have come back to roost and have roosted in the White House. And the vultures are gathering.
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. His latest book, Israel: An Introduction, has just been published by Yale University Press. Other recent books include The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). The website of the GLORIA
Center and of his blog, Rubin Reports. His original articles are published at PJMedia.
Professor Barry Rubin, Director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloria-center.org
The Rubin Report blog http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
He is a featured columnist at PJM http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/.
Editor, Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal http://www.gloria-center.org
Editor Turkish Studies,http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t713636933%22
--
No comments:
Post a Comment