• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

Tony Blair on the GWOT

Yesterday, the British PM gave a major foreign policy speech, the first of three. That speech delineated quite clearly why he thinks we’re in a clash not of civilizations, but a clash about civilization. One could wish that GW could speak with Blair’s eloquence, but the message is the same.

Noteworthy–among much–is his knocking those who find solace in knee-jerk demonization of the US.

I strongly urge you to read the whole thing; it’s only a few screens long. But among the highlights is this:

This terrorism will not be defeated until its ideas, the poison that warps the minds of its adherents, are confronted, head-on, in their essence, at their core. By this I don’t mean telling them terrorism is wrong. I mean telling them their attitude to America is absurd; their concept of governance pre-feudal; their positions on women and other faiths, reactionary and regressive; and then since only by Muslims can this be done: standing up for and supporting those within Islam who will tell them all of this but more, namely that the extremist view of Islam is not just theologically backward but completely contrary to the spirit and teaching of the Koran.

But in order to do this, we must reject the thought that somehow we are the authors of our own distress; that if only we altered this decision or that, the extremism would fade away. The only way to win is: to recognise this phenomenon is a global ideology; to see all areas, in which it operates, as linked; and to defeat it by values and ideas set in opposition to those of the terrorists.

The roots of global terrorism and extremism are indeed deep. They reach right down through decades of alienation, victimhood and political oppression in the Arab and Muslim world. Yet this is not and never has been inevitable. The most remarkable thing about reading the Koran – in so far as it can be truly translated from the original Arabic – is to understand how progressive it is. I speak with great diffidence and humility as a member of another faith. I am not qualified to make any judgements. But as an outsider, the Koran strikes me as a reforming book, trying to return Judaism and Christianity to their origins, rather as reformers attempted with the Christian Church centuries later. It is inclusive. It extols science and knowledge and abhors superstition. It is practical and way ahead of its time in attitudes to marriage, women and governance.

Under its guidance, the spread of Islam and its dominance over previously Christian or pagan lands was breathtaking. Over centuries it founded an Empire, leading the world in discovery, art and culture. The standard bearers of tolerance in the early Middle Ages were far more likely to be found in Muslim lands than in Christian.

This is not the place to digress into a history of what subsequently happened. But by the early 20th century, after renaissance, reformation and enlightenment had swept over the Western world, the Muslim and Arab world was uncertain, insecure and on the defensive. Some countries like Turkey went for a muscular move to secularism. Others found themselves caught between colonisation, nascent nationalism, political oppression and religious radicalism. Muslims began to see the sorry state of Muslim countries as symptomatic of the sorry state of Islam. Political radicals became religious radicals and vice versa. Those in power tried to accommodate the resurgent Islamic radicalism by incorporating some of its leaders and some of its ideology. The result was nearly always disastrous. The religious radicalism was made respectable; the political radicalism suppressed and so in the minds of many, the cause of the two came together to symbolise the need for change. So many came to believe that the way of restoring the confidence and stability of Islam was the combination of religious extremism and populist politics.

The true enemies became “the West” and those Islamic leaders who co-operated with them.

The extremism may have started through religious doctrine and thought. But soon, in offshoots of the Muslim brotherhood, supported by Wahabi extremists and taught in some of the Madrassas of the Middle East and Asia, an ideology was born and exported around the world…

The different aspects of this terrorism are linked. The struggle against terrorism in Madrid or London or Paris is the same as the struggle against the terrorist acts of Hezbollah in Lebanon or the PIJ in Palestine or rejectionist groups in Iraq. The murder of the innocent in Beslan is part of the same ideology that takes innocent lives in Saudi Arabia, the Yemen or Libya. And when Iran gives support to such terrorism, it becomes part of the same battle with the same ideology at its heart.

Related Posts:

  • None Found

About John Burgess
Former US Foreign Service Officer serving predominantly in the Middle East. Probably best defined as an East Coast Conservative. I blog about Saudi Arabia, the importance of US-Saudi relations, and efforts toward reform in that country at Crossroads Arabia.

Comments

  1. floyd says:

    are we supposed to believe that tony blair made this speech?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. John Burgess says:

    Well, since the link goes to the full text, as posted on the #10 Downing St. website (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page9224.asp), I think it’s a fair to assume that yes, Blair gave this speech.

    Unless, maybe, Xenu hacked the site.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Wonkette says:

    Rumors on the Internets: Lunacy Took the Red-eye…

    Ken “Wanna See Me Fit My Whole Foot In My Mouth?” Livingstone made London proud again. Blogger David Bernstein gives him a crash course in Jewish marriage — with a thinly veiled hint that he’s registered at Pottery Barn…….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Why We Fight On…

    What follows are excerpts from a speech given by British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the Foreign Policy Center in London.

    It is an exceptional speech:
    … the defining characteristic of today’s world is its interdependence; that whereas the econ…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0