Where We're Headed In Iraq

From Frontpage Magazine (HT aboo-Hoo-Hoo at LGF) :

In such circumstances, where two similar and yet rival civilizations claim true faith, conflict is inevitable, according to Lewis. Conflict with the Christian West began at the dawn of Islam when Muslim warriors burst out of Arabia and conquered Syria, Palestine and other lands previously held by Christian Byzantium. The Moors conquered Spain, and the Ottoman Turks captured land previously held by Christians, extending their conquest to Europe. In the 17th Century, Ottoman Turkish Corsairs raided Western Europe, and Europe was able to recover some of these lands, and enter the Islamic domain in the 18th and 19th Centuries.

“We are now experiencing a third attempt to bring Islam to Europe,” Lewis pointed out. Unlike the previous attempts that were primarily military in nature, the current Muslim push is through migration and demography. Freedom of expression, economic opportunities and moderate climates encouraged Muslim migration to Western Europe. The contrast between the high birthrates of Arab-Muslims in Europe and the negative rates of native Europeans, who marry late and have fewer children, may finally provide Islam with the chance to Islamize Europe.

The Bin Laden terrorist phenomenon has, according to Lewis, much to do with the perception that Jihad defeated the Red Army in Afghanistan. “The crucial moment” for the rise of Bin Laden, said Lewis, was the defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union. Some regard that as a Western victory; for Bin Laden, however, it was a victory for Islam and Jihad.

According to Lewis, Bin Laden exploited the all too willing Western media. Bin Laden’s argument was that the “ongoing struggle is between the superceded word of G-d and the latest word of G-d.” In Bin Laden’s vision, he was chosen to restore Islam and lead it to victory. Lewis explained that as the Jihadists see it, the end of the Caliphate (1924) following the abolition of the Ottoman Empire Sultanate (1922) by Kamal Ataturk was for Bin Laden the “ultimate humiliation.”

For Bin Laden, it is now the final stage in a three-act play. Having “destroyed the stronger and more deadly superpower,”the Soviet Union, “the effeminate American Empire is not a problem.” Bin Laden attacked U.S. installations in 1998 with impunity. Americans responded with “angry words” followed by “let’s get out of here.” This attitude began in 1983 Beirut after the U.S. Marine compound was destroyed and 241 U.S. Marines were killed, repeated in Somalia in 1994. Bin Laden’s attacks on American interests continued throughout the 1990’s, culminating with September 11, 2001, when Bin Laden opened the third phase - bringing his Jihad to America.

Bernard Lewis knows more about the Middle East and the cultural/political/religious divides than practically anyone else on the planet. He's forgetten more than most have ever learned about the subject, and that includes the members of Congress who think that if the war wasn't won by the May sweeps, we've lost.

Lewis knows that this is a conflict fought on a generational scale, not one that fits neatly into a US political calendar.

Unfortunately, the US politicans don't have the foresight or wherewithall to see this. They put their own personal political agendas ahead of that, and it undermines US national security.

And this has specific ramifications for the situation in Iraq, given as the media is taken with the idea that we've either lost or are losing the fight. Perhaps many in the US and Democrats in Congress have lost the will to fight, but the US hasn't lost in Iraq, and those who are on the ground there disagree with that assessment.

The problem is that those on the ground in Iraq aren't the ones making the decision. It's the members of Congress who keep putting together funding bills that would effectively result in defeat and retreat for the US, ceding the theater of operations to al Qaeda and the Islamist movement.

Complicating matters is the possibility that the Iraqi parliament will go on a 2-month vacation and are continuing to squabble over various issues. Some US politicians are mad as hell at the possibility that the Iraqi government would go on vacation during a crucial time. They might have a point, except that Congress went on a vacation during Easter break and didn't take any action on a funding bill (and since then have only submitted two different versions of a defeat and retreat bill that the President has either vetoed or would veto if passed). Maybe the Iraqi parlimentarians think that the US can solve their problems for them, and that's the concern that US politicians have (including the Administration given VP Cheney's visit to Baghdad this week). US politicians need to see the Iraqis working to solve their own problems as much as seeing results on the ground with US armed forces. The Iraqi government has to address hard issues, and going on vacation is perhaps a sign of denial and avoidance. However, that the Iraqi parliament has decided to go on vacation might speak to the strength of the Iraqi government and its faith in itself, rather than a sign of weakness of resolve since they believe that their country can sustain itself despite a break in the political action. Perhaps that is overly optimistic or even naive, but the Iraqis themselves don't seem to have a problem with the break.

US politicians do because there are US forces who are continuing to fight and die in Iraq against the ongoing insurgency and terrorist threat. They want to see signs that the Iraqis are committed to the fight. Taking a vacation doesn't help matters because the perceptions mean more than the reality.

And this says nothing of the ongoing threat posed by Iran. Opponents to the conflict in Iraq will claim that the US is trumping up the Iranian threat, even as Iran itself aggressively pursues nuclear weapons and is building an infrastructure to enrich uranium - that with enough time can produce nuclear weapons grade materials.

UPDATE:
Sauce for the goose - the Iraqi President thinks that the Iraqis need US forces in the country for another year or two. If I were going to be sarcastic, I'd say he's underestimating the situation by a couple of decades based on the European model (US forces are still in Germany). However, the Iraqis need to better show that they're capable of handling matters themselves without having the US Congress push benchmarks or timetables on them.