Monday, June 25, 2007

Destrust of Bush 03-05-09

Muslims reluctantly distrust Bush

Mirza A. Beg

Written on April 8, 2003
Birmingham Post-Herald May 9, 2003

The war in Iraq is won. The overwhelming superiority of American arms and technology though never in doubt has been proven again. Peace will depend on the true intentions of the victors.

The question asked before the war, comes to the fore once again, "What are the American intentions. Actions speak louder than words.

Bush and his advisors had decided to go to war with Iraq at least as early as the spring of 2002. Those who know the influences on US politics knew it. That is why no one believed the Kabuki play of going to the UN, trashing the UN when the UN showed some back bone and did not cower under relentless American Pressure.

Bush accused UN of cowardice as if it were afraid of Saddam Hussain the local, circumscribed thug, a tinhorn dictator. Actually the UN, a conglomeration of about 200 member nations did show some backbone in standing up to the only hyper-power in the world. Bush and Blair were able to cobble to gather a coalition of about 41 bullied, bought and bribed countries. About 161 countries did not join.

Will we have peace now? There are two points of view. One that does not believe in the benign pronouncements of Bush, the perception is based on his appointments of important powerful advisors, augmented by the actions of his administration. The other paints a rosy scenario that Middle East will finally taste democracy and start to change, sort of domino effect.

The events of 9/11 were so shocking that Americans gave Bush a free hand to deal with the situation. Though he kept saying that the war is not against Muslims but the terrorists who are extremist Muslims. His actions speak louder to the people in the Middle East and the Muslims of the world. What Bush says is considered rhetoric; what Ashcroft does to Muslims in US and what second tier advisors of Bush say about the Palestine, Muslims and Islam in public forums is the true policy. They would not get away with brazen behavior, if it were not the policy.


Bush gave Attorney General Ashcroft a free hand in arresting about 1,200 non-citizen Muslims of Middle Eastern ancestry on minor visa violation. Some were not even violations as they had applied for the status of permanent residence (the first step towards becoming a citizen). Granted the people who were responsible for the 9/11 tragedy were Muslims of Middle Eastern dissent.

The government not only had the right but a duty to check the background and possibilities of terrorism cells among such people. But they did not have to be arrested in the Soviet style, where they were not allowed to inform the family members. They were not told of the charges against them or allowed to contact a lawyer and were kept in solitary confinement for months, without a shred of evidence against an overwhelming majority of them. These draconian measures were a blatant misuse of state power; they are reminiscent of state tyranny over a stateless people.


There would be and should be a great consternation in the Jewish community and indeed among all decent Americans, if Bush were to appoint Louis Farrakhan as advisor on Mid East affairs and nominated David Duke for the board of US institute for Peace (A congress mandated think tank). It would rightly be considered to be an extremely anti-Jewish administration, in short anti-Semitic.

That is what Bush has done against the Muslims in appointing Elliot Abrams for the former and proposing Daniel Pipes for the later position. Similarly Richard Pearl was the chairman of the Defense Advisory Board till a few weeks ago when he was found with his hand in the cookie jar. He still is on the board. These and others in advisory role have a long record of virulent anti-Muslim anti-Middle Eastern stances as evident by their relentless advocacy of denying all rights to the Palestinians and their virulent writings.

Religious mentors:

Bush claims and is perceived to be religious. His mentors are, and his political base is led by Franklin Graham, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who have an ignoramus and hateful view of Islam. They pine for Armageddon, advocating injustice and war to bring about the Second-coming of the Prince of Peace. These are the people whose spiritual ancestors justified anti-Semitism and slavery. He has perfunctorily denied that he agrees with them on this issue, but hobnobs with them. Would he keep company with people who were anti-Semites and anti-Black in a similar fashion.

The Muslims are reluctantly beginning to realize that Mr. Bush is in the thrall of an unholy alliance between Israeli Likud party that will give no quarter to the Palestinians and Christian extremists (self declared Zionist Christians).

Most right-wing decent Christians do not realize that in their name these extremists advocate injustice and war on an oppressed people to bring about Armageddon. They advocate the most un-Christian behavior to help God as if God is not all powerful.

Israel kills Palestinian bystanders and children almost everyday as a matter of course by American-supplied weapons and is expelling Palestinians to settle Israelis using American supplied grants and aid. This glaring reality is obvious to the whole world except the American electorate.

Bush went after Saddam Hussain a secular tyrant denying rights to his people, but lauds a widely recognized war criminal Ariel Sharon as a man of peace. His detractors question Mr. Bush's intelligence, but to many Muslims around the world, he is seen as very stealthily working with a well laid out plan to satisfy the Israeli Likud- and American "Armageddon Christian" alliance.

The most important conflict in the world that practically every one has heard of is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Those who do not know the details are confused and have succumbed to the propaganda that it is thousands of years old conflict. The intelligentsia in this country, around the world and most of the Middle East know that the hapless European Jews persecuted for two thousand years, were given a pined for homeland in Palestine. This was the expiation of the western Christian conscience at the expense of a people, who if any thing were friendly to the Jews till the early 20th century. They turned against the settlers only to protect the land on which they have lived for more than a thousand years. Instead of understanding the rage and working to ameliorate the Palestinian plight, the Israeli hawks with the support of American liberals in the past and neo-conservative in the last 20 years have worked relentlessly to deprive the Palestinians of even half a loaf they were allowed to keep by the UN under the leadership of the United States in 1948.

The other view that after Iraq, Bush would try to find an equitable solution to Israel-Palestine conflict is loosing ground. After ignoring the killings of Palestinians by Israeli government and suicide bombing by Palestinian zealots for about a year Bush announced a grand scheme of a peace conference, with a road map for peace in March 2002. He keeps on postponing it, every once in a while at the insistence of Europeans, he makes a statement or two as a sop and then avoids the subject.

Extremists in the drivers seat:

It seems that religious extremist have taken hold of the world agenda for a convoluted peace. On the Islamic side, the miserable failure of dictatorial regimes in the garb of socialism has spawned religious reactionaries of the Bin Ladin types who advocate violence in the name of Islam. On the American side the decline of male dominated patriarchal family based on the liberal democratic policies and other societal ills, has spawned a virulent reactionary dogmatic movement that thrives on hate. Their spiritual ancestors hated Jews and Blacks. In the new power alignment they have found a new group to hate, they are Muslims. These may be called the "Armageddon Christians" to distinguish them from decent right wing Christians.

The Israeli lobby for their own expansionist agenda is fanning the flames on the side of the "Armageddon Christians".

Words that may have benign meanings to some are used in the most virulent ways by these extremists. On the Islamic side they give a narrow interpretation to Jihad, thus they may be called "Jihadis". On the Christian side they use the term Crusade which has acquired a benign meaning with time, they are better described as "Crusadies". And the on the Jewish side they have morphed their suffering of two thousand years in to zealotry, that is justifies by references to God's covenant, with chosen people thus "Zealots".

None of these are ignorant or foolish people. They have a tunnel vision that has come to dominate the world politics at the dawn of 21st century. All three groups are intent on doing evil in the name of God and misperceived selfish caricature of justice. It is important for all the decent peace loving people of the world to recognize them for what they are. Though they are driving their agenda from different sides, they are enemies of common good and humanity. One hopes that all decent Christian, Muslim and Jews reject these virulent people and work for justice and peace as enshrined in the US constitution and UN Charter, in the most humane way.

Mirza A. Beg's email is

No comments: