Category Archives: Middle East Turmoil

The Closing of the Muslim Mind

Posted on by

muslim_mindThe subtitle of this book by Robert R. Reilly is “How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis,” and the author certainly documents the basis for that subtitle. I did not enjoy reading this book for several reasons. It provides the Islamic words to interpret various descriptions and meanings, and I found that quite distracting.(Page 43 has 14 examples, to include fard for duty and mubah for permitted.) I was also disappointed early when the author announced that he was going to focus strictly on Sunni beliefs and was not going to discuss the “Shi’ites…except tangentially…” I was disappointed there wouldn’t be any help for me understanding the differences between those two groups.

The best of book is Chapter 8, “The Sources of Islamism.” It answers many of my questions about the Muslim Brotherhood and its widespread influence. The origin of the Muslim Brotherhood is traced back to the shock among Islamists over the abolition of the caliphate by Kemal Ataturk in 1924. (I have done a commentary including discussion of that event that I intend to post with this review.) The Muslims decided this must have been caused by their lack of faith. The only solution was to restore “…Muslim faith to a pristine condition.” In late forties and early fifties Sayyid Qutb traveled from Egypt to college in Greely, Colorado. He was disgusted by what he saw as a materialist and degenerate culture. He traveled back to Egypt and became a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. He went to the gallows in 1966 smiling, and that image inspires his followers today. It is worth noting that there were periods in the development of the Muslim Brotherhood that they modeled themselves after the Nazi Brownshirts and later were part of the Communist party in Egypt. Continue reading →

Marshall Plan for the Mideast

Posted on by

The commentary posted last week titled “Egyptian Turmoil” suggested that private American citizens with substantial resources should consider replicating what Herbert Hoover and other private citizens accomplished with what the American Relief Administration (ARA) did in Europe and Russia after World War I in the Mideast. “Famines were killing millions of people, The ARA set up a system of import and distribution that was feeding over ten million people a day in just the Soviet Union.”

I just finished reading “Partners in Command” about George Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower by Mark Perry, and have another suggestion that I believe is worthy of consideration. Europe was in desperate shape from the devastation of World War II. Marshall said, “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.” Continue reading →

Egyptian Turmoil

Posted on by

The world is watching nervously as millions of Egyptians continue their protests in Tahrir Square after the military announced that Mohamed Morsi is no longer President of Egypt. There is another gathering of Muslim Brotherhood supporters of Morsi. Some of them are pledging to “fight to the death” to prevent Morsi’s ouster. The U.S. apparently had not anticipated this turn. Ambassador Anne Patterson had said the U.S discouraged the protests and President Obama had refused to withdraw support of Morsi. The White House is now stressing “…that it does not support any particular party in Egypt, but rather the democratic process Continue reading →

The Benghazi Talking Points

Posted on by

Steve Hayes wrote an excellent article in the Weekly Standard about the editing of reports describing the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed the ambassador and three other Americans. The was obviously done to make the narrative “politically acceptable” to the  administration during a Presidential election campaign. Click on the link if you want to be informed about the story. I expect there will be more information revealed as additional journalists decide they have to put aside their desire to protect President Obama and actually perform as journalists. If you chose to read this postings you will find that I consider the most important question that has not been asked is what did the Commander-In-Chief know and what did he do.   Continue reading →

Benghazi–What Difference Does It Make

Posted on by

I have been astonished at the lack of attention given by several major media outlets to the attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, including our ambassador to that country. I understand that many in the media did not want anything to distract the voting public from re-electing Mr. Obama. They apparently now do not want anything to get in the way if Hillary Clinton chooses to run in 2016. Perhaps that’s why there was little media criticism when Clinton responded to a question whether the attack was a spontaneous protest or an organized terrorist attack. “Was it a protest or is it because of guys out on a walk one night and they decide they would go kill some Americans?”What difference, at this point, does it make?” The media celebrated the “brilliance” and emotion of her response. I was appalled at her response. Continue reading →

Mideast Turmoil

Posted on by

The media infatuation with the “Arab Spring” reminded me of the high hopes when Fidel Castro overthrew Batista in Cuba. There was a celebratory feel to the reporting about that event. The bloom was quickly taken off  when Che Guevara presided over show trials in a sports stadium and the summary execution of large numbers of people. There weren’t that many executions after the overthrow of dictators in the Middle East, although Moammar Gadhafi may have thought there was at least one important execution.

Democracy is always messier than dictatorships, and the recent protests, riots, and U.S. embassy attacks are a good reminder of that. There were two headlines in the Sunday, September 16, 2012 Denver post pertinent to the current events in that part of the world. One that doesn’t require much more explanation is “No Plan for Syria” by Albert Aji of the Associated Press. “The new international envoy tasked with ending Syria’s civil war summed up his first foray to Damascus on Saturday with a startling and frank admission that he has no plan for stopping the bloodshed that he warned could threaten world peace.”

The second headline was “Don’t give up on Arab Spring” by Shadi Hamid. He points out there is irony that Barrack Obama’s decision to intervene in Libya resulted in the overthrow of Gadhafi’s dictatorship. That set up the conditions for the attack on the U.S. embassy and the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stephens and three other Americans. Frighteningly, Mr. Hamid observes that Libya is “…the most pro-American country in the Arab world.” He also says anti-American sentiment “…will almost certainly increase after the NATO operations fades from memory. In fact…U.S. favorability ratings have been lower under Obama than they were in the final years of President George W. Bush’s administration.” There might be wisdom in observations that demonstration of strength results in respect and conciliation results in contempt.

U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East is in a terrible mess, and that probably shouldn’t be a surprise in an area where the control provided by brutal dictatorships has been removed. People have learned that they can gain political power with violence. I find it curious that the policies of the Obama administration are not being questioned by much of the U.S. media.  Reports seem to focus on Romney “getting in the way” with comments suggesting our foreign policy should not be based on apologies.