One of the
tenets of conservative thought on the issue of war with Israel, is the idea
that the West has been in
an ongoing continuous struggle against the Islamic world, and Israel is boldly
fighting on the front lines for us. But this is a massive misnomer, based on an
incorrect reading of history, and an oversimplification of our relationship
with the Middle East. There was a period of time there where the West was very
friendly with the Islamic peoples of the region.
Beaty, an
American Military Colonel who served in World War 2 notes,
“Though
the vote of Arabs and other Moslem peoples is negligible in the United States,
the significance of these Moslem peoples is not negligible in the world (see
the map entitled “The Moslem Block” on p. 78 of Badeau’ s East of Suez). Nor is
their influence negligible in the United Nations. The friendly attitude of the
United States toward Israel’s bloody extension of her boundaries and other acts
already referred to was effectively analyzed on the radio (NBC Network, January
8, 1951) by the distinguished philosopher and Christian (so stated by the
introducer, John McVane), Dr. Charles Malik, Lebanese Delegate to the United
Nations and Minister of Lebanon to the United States. Dr. Charles Malik of
Lebanon is not to be confused with Mr. Jacob (Jakkov, Yakop) Malik, Soviet
Delegate with Andrei Y. Vishinsky to the 1950 General Assembly of the United
Nations (The United Nations — Action for Peace, by Marie and Louis Zocca,
Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N. J., 1951). To his radio audience
Dr. Malik of Lebanon spoke, in part, as follows:
MR.
MALIK: The United States has had a great history of very friendly relations
with the Arab peoples for about one hundred years now. That history has been
built up by faithful missionaries, educators, explorers, and archaeologists and
businessmen for all these decades. Up to the moment when the Palestine problem
began to be an acute issue, the Arab peoples had a genuine and deep sense of
love and admiration for the United States. Then, when the problem of Palestine
arose, with all that problem involved, by way of what we would regard as
one-sided partiality on the part of the United States with respect to Israel,
the Arabs began to feel that the United States was not as wonderful or as
admirable as they had thought it was. The result has been that at the present
moment there is a real slump in the affection and admiration that the Arabs
have had towards the United States. This slump has affected all the relations
between the United States and the Arab world, both diplomatic and non-
diplomatic. And at the present moment I can say, much to my regret, but it is a
fact that throughout the Arab world, perhaps at no time in history has the
reputation of the United States suffered as much as it has at the present time.
The Arabs, on the whole, do not have sufficient confidence that the United
States, in moments of crises, will not make decisions that will be prejudicial
to their interests. Not until the United States can prove in actual historical
decision that it can withstand certain inordinate pressures that are exercised
on it from time to time and can really stand up for what one might call
elementary justice in certain matters, would the Arab people really feel that
they can go back to their former attitude of genuine respect and admiration for
the United States.”[1]
America, and
indeed other parts of the West, had a very friendly relationship with many Arab
peoples. That does not mean there has not been serious conflicts in history.
The Islamic conquests of the 7th century conquering much of the
Roman Empire are one notable example. The crusades where Western civilisation
sought to finally push back the tide of Islamic aggression and make passage to
the Holy Land safe again is another example. The conflict between the Barbary
Pirates and basically everyone else is notable, and was only really settled by
the Marines in their visit to Tripoli. And there were wars on and off between
European powers and Islamic powers as well throughout history. No doubt. I do
not deny any of this and have written about it.
However, this
does not mean that the Islamic world and the West have been locked in an
eternal struggle for dominance. Right now the Western world is neither
Christian, nor truly civilized. We appear to have done more damage to ourselves
than any invading armies have ever done. So, the situation is more complicated
than it is often presented.
But what
Beaty says about World War 3 is really notable. He writes,
“Thus
the Middle East flames — in Iran, on the “Israeli” frontier, and along the Suez
Canal.
Could
we put out the fires of revolt which are so likely to lead to a full scale
third World War? A sound answer was given by The Freeman (August 13, 1950),
which stated that “all we need to do to insure the friendship of the Arab and
Moslem peoples is to revert to our traditional American attitudes toward
peoples who, like ourselves, love freedom.” This is true because the “Moslem
faith is founded partly upon the teachings of Christ.” Also, “Anti-Arab
Policies Are Un-American Policies,” says William Ernest Hocking in The
Christian Century (“Is Israel A ‘Natural Ally’?” September 19, 1951).
Will
we work for peace and justice in the Middle East and thus try to avoid World
War III? Under our leftist- infested State Department, the chance seems about
the same as the chance of the Moslem voting population and financial power
surpassing those of the Zionists during the next few years in the State of New
York!”[2]
Beaty sees
American foreign policy with regards to Israel and the Middle East as a clear
possible cause of World War 3. A region that we were previously not at war with
for some time has been ignited because of the West’s desire to dominate the
region, and enforce the creation of a state of Israel in that region. This was
written in 1951, so this is not revisionist history. This is forward thinking
analysis.
Now, I do not
agree with what Beaty says in every part of this book. I especially disagree
with him quoting someone who says that Islam is partly founded on the teachings
of Jesus. More accurately it is founded on heretical changings of Jesus
teachings, along with gnostic heresies and other errors. But still, he was a senior American officer in the Military in the
World War 2 period and he notes that US foreign policy wrecked America’s
relationship with the Arab peoples. This is notable, and really is is that hard to accept this?
Myself, and
others, have made this point ourselves on occasion. That a partisan approach to
supporting everything Israel does simply exacerbates conflict in this region.
When someone of this experience saw this coming, it is worth noting. I have
said on several occasions that the Jewish people have a right to a sovereign
state. All peoples do. But no one has a right to demand that other nations make
it possible for them, fight for them, or ruin their relations with other
nations to do so.
I don’t think
our relationship with Islamic nations is irreparable. The Crusades were
eventually a thing of the past, and this century of blunders will be too. But
the sooner we stop trying to dominate the region for any reason, whether to
support Israel, or otherwise, the sooner we can see peace.
List of
References
No comments:
Post a Comment