I wanted to take note of a single sentence in David Ignatius’s Washington Post column on Russia’s increasing involvement in Syria:
Putin embodies a kind of muscular diplomacy the United States disdained over the past three years of halfhearted attempts to train and equip the Syrian opposition. Obama’s failure to develop a coherent strategy left the field open for Putin.
because it illustrates everything that’s wrong with the Washington prevailing wisdom, of which Mr. Ignatius is the haruspex. There are several assumptions bundled into the sentence, first, that there is a coherent interventionist policy for the U. S. in Syria. It also assumes something else: that Russia has entered the lists in Syria solely because of a vacuum produced by U. S. inaction. Neither of those is true.
The first is not true because the choice in Syria is between the Assad government and radical Islamists. However much the Administration might wish there were liberal democrats in Syria just waiting for their opportunity to form a a government there isn’t one. There’s the more-or-less secularist Alawite government of Assad and his regime, there’s Al Qaeda and groups affiliated with them, and there’s DAESH and groups affiliated with them. That’s it. All are bad choices, inconsistent with American interests or values but, sadly, the Assad government is probably the best of the lot. Given how awful that regime is that’s not something any American president is likely to admit.
But as we have seen in Iraq DAESH would be even worse. Iraq was ethnically and religiously diverse with Arabs, Kurds, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Muslims, Christians, and Yezidis, just to name a few of the many groups that have called the country “home”. DAESH is changing that in the areas it controls. No one other than Sunni Arabs is safe in those areas and those are only safe as long as they adhere to a particularly harsh and antiquated form of Islam.
And do I really need to remind anyone that Al Qaeda was responsible for the most deadly terrorist attack on U. S. soil in history? I see no circumstances under which supporting Al Qaeda is in our interests.
But the second is even more absurd. Syria is in Russia’s neighborhood. Sevastopol is about 750 miles from Damascus—roughly the distance between New York City and Atlanta. The travel time is 33 hours overland. Russia is much more threatened by violent radical Islamism than we are. It has about three times as many Muslims as we do and some are very radicalized. Indeed, the Boston Marathon bombers were Chechens and there are many Chechens fighting the Assad government in Syria. They have good reason to believe that what happens in Syria won’t stay in Syria.
Far from needing a more muscular or interventionist policy in Syria, the U. S. needs a less interventionist policy in Syria. We shouldn’t be supporting radical Islamists under any circumstances. Actual U. S> military intervention means risking a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia. Do I really need to remind anyone that Russia is the only country other than the United States able to bring life on earth to an end? Direct confrontation with Russia would be foolhardy in the extreme.
The best thing we can do right now in Syria is maintain a low profile.
They simply create their own version of reality, and this is usually called fantasy. With enough money, most fantasies can be transformed into reality, and the US is fabulously wealthy compared to any country past or present in relative wealth.
The political pundits build virtual Potemkin Villages, and the political leaders sell them to their adherents. They build port cities deep inland with no access to water, and their adherents proclaim the strategic importance of these ports for moving goods. There is no way to argue with them. The adherents and possibly the political leaders and pundits are convinced that these cities exist and that they are bustling ports.
Their reasoning is basically circular, but they refuse to understand it. The Port of Las Vegas is a port because it is named a port, and it was named a port by an expert. The expert studies cities with port in their name, and Las Vegas makes a lot of money. Ports that make a lot of money transfer a lot of goods, and therefore, the Port of Las Vegas is a bustling port.
They sense something is not quite right, but they still stick to the playbook. ISIS is a totally different animal than al-Qaeda, but they cannot grasp it. ISIS is like the Huns. There is no reasoning with them. When they are not killing and maiming, they are torturing, but they do not torture according to the kindergarten rules. They use the methods beyond the comprehension of today’s 21st Century men and women.
The barbarians are at the gates, and there are no pleasant ways to beat them back. In truth, ISIS is a product of Western success. The wealth allowed Western liberal democracies to become soft, and this was encouraged by left and right. ISIS recruits using the concepts the West has delegitimized, and many in the world still value those concepts. Many of them live in the Middle East, and they are not changing any time soon.
If the political pundits and leaders really want to stop the barbarians, they will need to give up their luxuries. The country will need to become a radically different place, and not just for everybody else. It would need to include them. They would need to be subject to random searches on the street, in their house, on-line, in their safe-deposit box, etc.
In the end, it would not matter. Somebody else would come along to replace them. The concepts that are worthless will not suddenly become valuable. More than likely, many will try to make peace with the barbarians as they are slaughtering their friends and family.
When the barbarians are at the gates, the men and women of luxury do not think to pick up a cudgel, a pike, or a gun and beat them back. No, the elites believe that picking up a pen or a microphone and beating back their political opponents is as effective or better.
I think that’s true and possibly in more ways than you intend.
I have several ways in mind. In values, ideals have been hollowed out at best and corrupted at worst. In many instances, they are simply devalued. Humans without some form of philosophical basis are animals, and a philosophical basis require ideals even ones we may detest.
Success has also left the West lazy and unwilling to do what is required. They have the wealth to will the means, and they assume that this entitles them to an end as well. They do not realize or care that the means are composed of animate and thinking being no matter how worthless they may deem them. Furthermore, these animate and thinking beings do not necessarily have the same ends as a goal.
Success has left the West with the impression that this is the culmination of history. The 21st Century man and woman actually believes that human history had no meaning prior to the iPhone, and if something has no social network, it does not exist.
I do not doubt you could add to this, but you have what was once considered a liberal education. You are a relic, and there is no app for you. (Is there a Renaissance Man app?)
ISIS is tapping into what the Millennials are missing – a soul. They are offering them one simply by joining, and the Millenials are flocking to ISIS.
I expect more radical groups to start recruiting in the coming years. The racists, the green terrorists, animal rights activists, and other assorted radicals will all increase the religious aspects.
Chesterton said this nicely: “When men no longer believe in God they will not believe in nothing. They will believe in anything.”