Do As I Say, Not As I Do?

[fish]

Good 'ol George Bush and his administration are calling on Turkey to refrain from crossing the boarder into Iraq, to try and flush out the PKK, who have been waging a war of terror for many years. A true example of Do As I Say, Not As I Do?

[mockney piers]

Well quite. They're also warning Iran not to intefere with the internal politics of Iraq. Hmm, a bit rich there.

On a wider point Turkey might want to consider negotiation at some point; until the politics are addressed that war will continue indefinitely, a war which neither side can win.

The British gov't and the IRA both worked this one out as early as the mid-late seventies, which is why negotiations were started tentatively as far back as that. Took along time to where we are today, but how much better is everyone for that?

In fact some quite high profile think-tank types in the US are quite sensibly proposing starting dialogue with Al-Qaeda. The rhetoric of the 'war on terror' serves nobody but the extremists, whether a neocon hawk or the really nasty elements of terrorist/insurgents. There are always moderates with political ends who hold the centre ground, and it is with these that you have to negotiate.

[DaveR]

When you start dialogue with Al Quaeda, what are you going to offer them? Parliamentary seats in Algeria? An Islamic government in Malaysia?

The rhetoric in the 'war on terror' comes from both sides, and the last time I looked Al Quaeda were claiming they would only be satisfied when they have established a worldwide caliphate.

It's pretty well accepted that the Kurds are the largest 'nation' in the world without a counrty, and the Turks (as well as the Iraqis) have always refused to compromise with any kind of autonomy. I'm no fan of Bush but it makes sense to try and resolve regional conflicts which are capable of a political settlement. Al Quaeda hardly falls into that category

[mockney piers]

I think I was pretty explicit about the rhetoric coming from both sides.

What do you offer them? How about the taking measures with teeth against nasty autocratic regimes who routinely torture their own political prisoners. No coincidence that most of the attackers were Saudis. How about the possibility of real democracy in their countries, and perhaps not installing a bloody great military base in every country from Uzbekistan through to Saudi Arabia.

It's very easy to paint the 'other' as bloodthirsty fanatics who hate 'our' way of life from either side of the fence. They clearly exist but most will (and al qaeda's really a broad banner term for local struggles) have deliverable aims.

If Algeria became a democracy or Malaysia voted to be an islamic state (and remember we tacitly supported the Algerian Junta who persecuted a particularly brutal oppression after refusing to cede power to a democratically elected ialamic gov't) then perhaps these people would get parliamentary seats or an islamic gov't, and none of our business frankly if they did.

How arrogant is it of us to stand in their way?

There are many difficult issues need addressing, and there are no easy answers, but I refuse to see how a 500lb bomb on a wedding party, or a cluster bomb on a poor deprived neighbourhood does that more effectively than dialogue.

[DaveR]

"measures with teeth" - we invade Saudi? Malaysia already is a democracy, with an Islamic party participating in elections. And how exactly did we tacitly support the Algerian Junta?

I am all in favour of encouraging democracy wherever possible, but you cannot ignore that the ideology of Al quaeda is explicitly driven by hatred of our way of life, and is wholly intolerant of all the values of a liberal democracy. In the long term the idea must be to detach this ideology from other conflicts, which is what I understand is being attemprted in Iraq. I don't see how dialogue with Al Quaeda itself is going to help

[mockney piers]

"measures with teeth" - we invade Saudi?

Not at all, but selling them electric cattle prods, that we have evidence are used in torturing prisoners, or shutting down investigations into corruption that result in selling them $40 billion worth of the most sophisticated weaponry in the world is hardly up there with taking action is it.

"Malaysia already is a democracy" Indeed it is, but if an Algeria happened there I've no doubt that we would do the same. Be conspicuous by our silence when we know what is going on, share intelligence and continue to cooperate, when condemnation would be the honourable thing. Exactly like our tacit support of Israel's million odd cluster bomblets raining down on Lebanon recently.

"but you cannot ignore that the ideology of Al quaeda is explicitly driven by hatred of our way of life, and is wholly intolerant of all the values of a liberal democracy". Maybe, maybe not. The thing is not to mistake rhetoric for reality. Or do you believe that Bush's express intention of his policies is to spread democracy?

"In the long term the idea must be to detach this ideology from other conflicts, which is what I understand is being attemprted in Iraq."

Exactly, that's what the proposals of dialogue are all about, about teasing out the rhetoric and addressing the local issues, seperately in places like Indonesia (where our support of Suharto's genocide wasn't even tacit, it was active!!). Every where another "al qaeda" atrocity occurs is not motivated by a desire for a global caliphate, but by disenfranchised people with real grievances. You police against it and talk behind the scenes.

The rhetoric of "we shall never negotiate" a la Thatcher is not only self-defeating, it's usually completely untrue!!

I've no doubt we'll be reading in the press in a couple of years time that we're already negotiating, leaving this entire argument pretty moot.

*edited for money amount, $40 wouldn't get anyone very far

[DaveR]

"Every where another "al qaeda" atrocity occurs is not motivated by a desire for a global caliphate, but by disenfranchised people with real grievances. You police against it and talk behind the scenes. "

New York. London, Madrid?

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

If the West didn't back, or bring about, the abuse by often externally imposed leaders, of the citizens of many countries worldwide in order to control their resources to keep our economies afloat, I doubt anyone would listen to the likes of Al Quaeda in the first place.

Their hardship is directly related to our economic buoyancy.

If they lived in countries whose leaders and economic systems were not imposed on them by the West to the detriment of the majority of their people, do you really think they would hate us as much as they do?

[mockney piers]

I'm mostly referred to the post Afghanistan al qaeda, but even with your examples yes, yes and sort of. Just because we don't agree, and the methods are monstrous, doesn't mean the grievance is entirely baseless. You give three examples, but there are somewhere between 3 civilians an hour ('official' figures) and one every three minutes (lancet report) being killed in Iraq thanks to our policies.

These are obviously hugely emotive issues, but unless you want indefinite conflict you have to be prepared to lay the past to rest.

Witness McGuiness and Paisley working together, indeed McGuiness recently met up with representatives of the Sunni and Shia communities of Iraq to help them start of a framework of dialogue to help bring about an end to the sectarian strife there.

[DaveR]

"If the West didn't back, or bring about, the abuse by often externally imposed leaders, of the citizens of many countries worldwide in order to control their resources to keep our economies afloat, I doubt anyone would listen to the likes of Al Quaeda in the first place.

Their hardship is directly related to our economic buoyancy.

If they lived in countries whose leaders and economic systems were not imposed on them by the West to the detriment of the majority of their people, do you really think they would hate us as much as they do?"

As has been pointed out, most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi - hardly a country with a leadership imposed on them by the West. Indonesia? No. Pakistan? No. I could go on. As for ecomomic buoyancy, the whole of the Islamic world is far less important to the UK economy than the US, or the EU.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

The Saudi dictatorship has it's own issues, but yes it is backed by the west despite its horrendous human rights record.

Ditto Pakistan and Indonesia.

What about Somalia. They were actually experiencing their first peace in decades, but because it was a muslim group who had driven out the US financed war lords and imposed law and order, the Americans paid the Ethiopians to go 'rescue' the country from the muslim 'extremists' and reinstall their own extremists.

[mockney piers]

"most of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi - hardly a country with a leadership imposed on them by the West"

Err, that's pretty much exactly what it is. It was a British protectorate after we helped the house of Saud overthrow the Ottomans. We signed the country over to his dynasty in 1926 an it's remained an autocratic monarchy since with a great deal of support from the West.

Indonesia? Yes again, Suharto was directly supported in his murderous campaigns to stamp his control on the country.

Pakistan? No you're right, but amazing how Musharaff turned from being a usurping pariah to our staunchest ally when he joined the war on terror.

My whole point is that the rhetoric of the war on terror only serves benefit the rhetoric of the enemy. Sideline it as the minority extremist radical (essentially marxist) ideology it is and it will burn out. Then you have to address the grievances of those who have taken up it's banner in this current climate, in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia (not while it's got oil), Iraq (although the Iraqis seem to be doing this for themselves, sometimes the enemy of your enemy is not the sort of friend you want) etc.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Sometimes when I read erudite reason I get all emotional...

Nice one MP

[mockney piers]

aww fanks :-$

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Haha I knew you'd fill in the gaps in my Swiss cheese memory MP!

[SeanMacGabhann]

one can only BEGIN to wonder how those holes came about CWALD ;-)

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Errrr, busted!

[Floating Onion]

Well the Americans do like to lead by example, definitely do what I say:

http://www.psychsound.com/2007/10/a_tale_of_two_decisions_or_how.html

Not what I do. Or is that guilty until proven innocent?

(and no, I'm not American)

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Damn, that's horrible, especially the bit where you hear the guy's actual words. I read a lot of stuff like this when I studied asylum law, but not from the US. When you actually hear what happens, and look at the country research that backs it all up, it is sickening.