RF_alum’s recent post  on a Marshall Plan for the Mid-East got me thinking.  A prosperous Western Europe has, I think, been good for America and good for the world.  A peaceful Europe has certainly been better than another World War.  Entrenched hatreds have faded (though not vanished: look at Cyprus).  But if the French and the Germans can become partners, surely there is hope for other long-standing enemies.

Children in classroom: Dmitri Markine Photography

RF_alum quotes a key concept:  “What was needed to prevent future wars was not just military strength, but also economic well-being, which included the provision of fuel, food, and other necessities of life for the people of those nations that had suffered most during the war.”  This observation would seem to apply to the Middle East as well as it did to post-WWII Europe and to tribal and insurrectionist groups as well as to countries.

Of course, America faces different challenges in our dealings with Middle Eastern countries where we lack the comprehensive ethnic and cultural ties we had with Europe.  In the Middle East the US government is viewed, at best, with suspicion.  We may think of America as a powerful nation, but there are some things our government simply cannot do.  Our foreign aid cannot be altruistic.  Our politics may mandate that, for example, aid be purchased from American companies or be tied to coercion of other governments.  NGOs and private charities have a better opportunity to incubate change in the Middle East and private enterprise should participate, too.

Islamist extremists present a particular problem.  I think there is an element of human nature that leads some individuals and some communities to religious fundamentalism.  I don’t think you can kill this tendency off.  New fundamentalists are born every year and have a right to live their own lives as they see fit.  Governments need to find ways to respect all their citizens without violent conflict.

I know one successful group in America that rejects the majority society:  The Amish.  Of course, there are no Amish terrorists.  Quite the opposite: they are known for “letting-be”, personal humility, and reluctance to self-promote.  They are not the only group that has a successful, separate religious society within America.  Hasidic Jews  also come to mind.

Maybe Islamist extremists will never evolve into such a admirable societies, but I wonder if most fundamentalist Muslims might find a model in the Amish.

Kasbah JerzyStrzelecki GNU Free Documentation License

Here perhaps my thoughts wander into fiction, but I envision towns that are up-front about being Islamist and using Sharia law internally.  The freedom to choose would be critical.  Every individual would have the freedom to move out of such Islamist towns.

I envision a border crossing building with lockers where residents who go outside for some reason could change back into the required garb as they return – and tourists could view instructional videos before entering.  Tourism could become a big industry if visitors felt safe.

Sharia law presents a challenge to human rights, since draconian punishments and honor killings seem to be part of today’s Middle East tribal areas.  The country would have to enforce a residency agreement.  To remain a resident in this special town, individuals must submit to whatever the Sharia court decides.  If they refuse they would be banished.  If an individual left the town, it would be illegal for anyone, including her relatives, to harass or harm her outside.  For “immigrants”, the town’s internal authorities would set up “conversion” requirements for anyone wanting to move into the special town.  As in covenant-controlled communities, the residency agreement would be a contract between competent, consenting adults.

I doubt such Islamist towns would die out.  Consider my example from America.  Amish are free to leave their communities, but their numbers are growing and 90% of Amish young adults choose to stay.  Hassid communities are also growing.  Why would observant Muslims think the teachings of Mohammad are less compelling than the teachings of Jakob Ammann or Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov?  All it would take is a willingness on all sides, within the rule of law and respecting human rights, to let infidels go to hell in the manner of their own choosing.