Middle East ' younger' nations seems more clear than Europeans in dealing with terrorism
Europe: Cultural Apartheid
London- Sunday 27 November 2005:
In dealing with terror attacks, societies like Jordan, seems to be more cohesive and united behind the leadership in a quest for clear aim, namely defeating terrorism, while European nations like Spain and even Britain seem to be less cohesive, divided and same blame ' the victim' instead of fighting terrorism, thus sending the wrong message to those who want to destroy democracy. By Adel Darwish.
The recent terrorist
attacks on Jordanian soil forcing one to compare the reaction of its citizens
to that of other more politically developed nations.
In Jordan, people of all ages and ethnic groups took to the streets in protest
against terrorism and calling for death to terror master Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
For his part, King
Abdullah II, who has inherited the courage, wisdom and resolve of his late
father, King Hussein, described terrorism as an epidemic declaring his nation
is calling for an “ international war” against terrorism. The Jordanian
monarch also referred to the Iraqi couple, sent by al Zarqawi to turn a
wedding ceremony into a funeral, as “mentally unstable”.
the Jordanian did not expect to be targeted since they were not part of the
coalition which invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. The Hashemite
Kingdom
was always a haven for the Palestinian people and the launch pad for their
resistance.
Also taken by surprise, the people of Jordanian immediately opted to join the coalition against terrorism and called for the war against terror to stepped-up in self-defence.
In Comparison, in Spain , the response to the Madrid train bombings was weak; united in grief, the Spanish people stood in silence, contrary the Jordanians who protested angrily and demanded the perpetrators be punished in hell.
Under the slogan ‘Basta’,
or enough, the Spaniards rallied against their prime minister at the time,
Jose Maria Aznar, and US president George W. Bush despite their leading role
in the coalition fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda responsible for the attacks
in Madrid . Instead of condemning the aggressors and supporting the war on
terror, as the Jordanians did, a year later, the Spanish elected a government
that had pledged to withdraw from the fight against terrorism!
In spite of the vast
difference in the technological, cultural, economic and political maturity ,
between European countries and its Muslim counterparts especially those
recently created, the latter are more likely to succeed in developing a
realistic model to deal with the terrorist threat and eradicate it.
This can be accomplished if the people and their leaders agree to tackle the
problem head on, instead of treading cautiously for fear of offending certain
groups, especially as the terrorists have already tainted religion with
violence.
Jordanians did not allow themselves to believe that the war on those who
hijacked Islam would hurt their Islamic credentials, as other governments did.
Other hesitant, schizophrenic regimes targeted terrorist groups militarily, while their official policies, at the same time, implemented the terrorists’ demands by censuring performing arts, cultural output and curbing freedom of expression… to fend off accusations by fundamentalists clergy of anti-Muslim bias.
European countries, including the United Kingdom , are increasingly adopting
opposing strategies. On the one hand, they are implementing the terrorists’
agenda by curtailing the freedom of expression, liberal and secular
activities so as not to ‘ offend ethnic minorities sensibilities’ , under the
banner of political correctness in Britain (and affirmative action in the
U.S.) For example, a number of municipalities have cancelled the tradition of
Santa handing out presents, nativity plays and Christmas trees in order ‘ not
to offend’ Muslims. Rebellious teenage Muslim Schoolgirls have also enjoyed
government backing against headmistresses trying to discipline them for
discarding their school uniform.
On the other hand, the same governments have attacked civil liberties, decreased the powers of the judiciary and boosted those of the police, so that a an innocent unarmed young man was shot dead eight times in the head by three armed police officers for merely being suspect. These regimes also enacted emergency laws to rival those of totalitarian regimes and squandered taxpayers’ money on institutions which only serve to widen the gap between Muslim immigrants and the rest of society instead of taking measures to make society more cohesive and help immigrant communities to integrate in the wider British nation.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s policies, for instance, is actually helping the terrorists’ goals by destroying liberalism and isolating Muslims in a cultural ghetto, thereby forcing them to turn inwards, in preparation for a civil war.
In spite of the increase
in terrorist attacks in countries such as Morocco , Jordan and Iraq , these
socially cohesive nations are more likely to develop- in the long-term- into
nation states enjoying a high degree of freedom than European countries. The
latter lack a clear vision on how to retain their liberal traditions (such as
the freedom of ownership, individual choice and expression), at a time when
their policies are increasing social fragmentation between religious and
secular groups.
European countries are facing a crisis as they seek to redefine their national
identities after being targeted by terrorism in the name of Islam - Spain in
the hands of its Moroccan immigrants and Britain by its second generation
migrants- which has destroyed their unique social and cultural fabric. In The
Netherlands, an artist was murdered because his work did not please Islamic
extremists, the Sikhs shut down a theatre in Britain after objecting to a play
it was showing. The riots in France have also increased the fears of an
impending European- Islamic war.
In short, the
multiculturalism concept in Britain and the assimilation model in the French
secular republic have only lead to cultural apartheid. There are no longer a
multitude of cultures but two: that of the majority and the imported culture
of a vocal Muslim minority capable, by blowing itself and others up, of
silencing dissenting liberal voices. The British government is currently
paying the price for the hostility of this minority, as is evident in New
Labour’s policies.
Ridiculously, the British Foreign Office seems to be blindly following the
lead of American policies although the ‘achievements’ of US foreign policy
leaves much to be desired!
For example, it has
started observing Ramadan but has yet to celebrate with Sikh, Jewish or Hindu
festivities. While female cancer patients had to go to
the high court in
order to receive the adequate medication, that was cut back due to lack of
funds, the Foreign Office is funding an Islamic Media Team, whose performance
is lesser than that of street performers aspiring to entertain a poor wedding
party in the most deprived part of Egypt!
This official policy has created a diplomatic and media schism between the
Muslim community and the rest and will therefore increase the isolation of
Muslims, as part of a new cold war.
This Islamic Media Team, often delays ‘Muslim journalists’ attending meetings
with senior British government officials, by days after their British
counterpart do, and on the rare occasions these meetings occur, journalists
discover their material has already been published by others!
Until European countries stop their hypocrisy and define a clear-cut policy
for integration, Osama bin Laden, Ayaman al Zawahiri and al Zarqawi will
continue to smile confidently.
© Adel Darwish 2005
