Action and Reactions: United we Stand, United we Fall?
The US has recently found itself in an almost unfamiliar situation: a ‘war on terror’ against a threat that much of Western world and beyond is united against; and more importantly a war that is popular. Following several years of uneasy US involvement with intervention and costly wars, the dominant power is extending its reach once again, this time with a supported cause: the growing threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, an acronym that has become widely familiar over the past few months. Following the recent extensively publicised beheadings of Western journalists, ISIS has emerged as the true image of evil in the Middle East today, and there is no denying that it is a hugely substantial threat to stability in the region.
Yet it shouldn’t be forgotten that ISIS’ appearance is not an entirely unexplained phenomena but that it is almost a direct consequence of the illegal US involvement in Iraq. Its rise is only a renewed testament to the current problematic image of the ‘liberal peace project’. Throughout history war has been fought by those who appear to seek to instil values of liberty, equality and freedom, a seemingly utilitarian approach: from the teachings of St. Augustine and the spread of war as a function to protect the values of Christianity, to the arrival of the US Founding Fathers in ‘liberating’ those who in their eyes appeared backward and uncivilised, to the French revolution and so on, and now to the current trend often termed as ‘cultural imperialism’, with Western countries actively seeking to impose their liberal values, be it through economic and/or structural changes in the fabric of societies in which they are intervening. Without understanding the needs and desires of these societies, or with a focus on short term aims rather than long term solutions, external actors risk aggravating situations further, including, and not limited to, the potential rise of support for repressive actors and belligerents.
Recent airstrikes in Syria and Iraq have been portrayed as necessary acts towards eventual stability, despite little prior motive to engage in the region, especially in Syria where for more than three years it has been a country plagued by civil war and unrest. Now with the international surfacing of ISIS, and their portrayal as a force comparable to the likes of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, intervention became the only option in the eyes of the international community, led by the US. In a statement by President Obama a few weeks ago it was stated that they were joined with “friends and partners” of the region in a coalition against the appalling acts of ISIS. One notable example here, though by no means the only questionable of those listed as allies to the US, is Saudi Arabia, an important economic partner in the region. It is hard to deny that the upsurge in support for US action in Syria and Iraq climaxed specifically with the release of the footage showing the horrific beheadings by ISIS. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, has reportedly beheaded 59 people since January this year as part of their judicial system, yet this is conveniently ignored. Though they also adhere to strict Sharia Law, are known for human rights abuses, misogynist policies, and violent oppression they are not similarly demonised and remain to be one of the hegemon’s key allies in the area.
Another culminating effect this new proclaimed war on terror has had, has been the gross growth of Islamophobia in the US that has now been given a renewed platform, related its dramatic increase following 9/11, not only among the general population but also amongst news organisations and politicians. These actors seem to be deaf to any attempt to defend such generalisations and stereotypes, instead rushing to support misinformed views such as Bill Maher with his recent sweeping comments and demonization of Islam, though this is by no means the first public voicing of these opinions. Even just watching the interviews – though perhaps interrogations is more appropriate here – of academic Reza Aslan in response to such bigoted, reveals a growing bias and lack of openness to hear any views that may be contrary to popular belief.
Islamophobia appears to have become common in such ‘tolerant’ societies; and the US is by no means the only perpetrator. Yet, as we can see in these recent cases, particularly in the supposed ‘land of the free’, a clear pattern of discrimination towards Muslim populations has emerged, with added assumptions that all Muslims are cast from the same mould as extremists like members of ISIS. Such assumptions lead to the belief that Islam as a faith is inherently violent, misogynist, intolerant and that it promotes terrorism. These are assumptions that are false, and the sooner these generalisations are highlighted as being unfounded in all sections of society, the sooner those seeking to partake in future wars or intervene under a humanitarian blanket can genuinely move forward with reconciliation in the regions in which they are involved.
Photo Credits: Iraqi News
