We Must Unite to Fight ISIS

As an American Muslim, I cannot find words strong enough to condemn the barbaric attack in Paris by ISIS that has claimed over 100 lives and injured many more. I hope that a significant proportion of the estimated 5 million French Muslims, the largest in Europe, will take to the streets to denounce the terrorist organization. The cancer of ISIS must be eliminated not just for the sanctity of human civilization but for its survival.

It is tragic that Muslims are fleeing their homelands (Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and more) by the thousands because of the persecution and the instability wrought by a band of fanatics. The Paris attack by ISIS will worsen their condition as suspicion and intolerance against them mount.

Two wrongs, of course, cannot make a right. In this case, there is only one wrong that must be made right, and that is to decisively defeat ISIS and cleanse the earth of its nihilistic ideology.

Some of us fall for the seductive appeal of the “Yes, But” syndrome to explain away any event or catastrophe. Yes, Afghanistan is a mess but isn’t American overreach in the aftermath of 9/11 one of the main causes? Yes, Iraq is an unending disaster but isn’t George Bush’s war against Saddam Hussein based on the mythical weapons of mass destruction the main reason why things are the way they are?

True on both counts but the “Yes, But” explanation cannot be used to justify the horror that ISIS has unleashed around the world. Whatever the dark forces that gave birth to it, this terrorist organization is now bent on destroying anything that stands in the way of its brutal worldview through murder and mayhem.

Which is why we must unite against it, irrespective of our race or creed.

Recent events indicate that ISIS is on the run. Kurdish and rebel Syrian forces, with the help of airstrikes by a U.S.-led coalition, have retaken several strategic towns in northern Iraq and Syria. Evidence is also mounting that a drone strike has killed Mohammed Emwazi, the infamous “Jihadi John” responsible for beheading American journalist James Foley, among others. (Not many Americans are aware that Kuwait’s Jassem Emwazi, the 51-year-old father of “Jihadi John,” called his son a dog, an animal, a terrorist and hoped that he would die and go straight to hell when the first video of the beheading surfaced.)

So what does a terrorist organization do to keep its flickering flame alive in the hearts of its delusional followers? Sow seeds of anarchy by killing people at random when they are out enjoying a concert, for instance, or dining at a restaurant. That’s what happened in the City of Light last Friday.

Although lingering echoes of “where are the moderate Muslims” still persist in some conservative corridors of America, by and large this canard is gradually receding. There is a reason for it. All major Muslim organizations in America, and for that matter, around the world, have condemned the attack in Paris.

This did not keep Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump from calling for more scrutiny of American mosques. Mr. Trump would have done Muslims a favor if he could also identify which mosques should be under surveillance, unless he meant, of course, all mosques.

In the Friday congregational prayers that I attended in recent months in the Bay Area, for instance, the majority of the sermons by Imams were directed against ISIS and how it was violating the most fundamental tenets of the faith through its contempt for life. A YouTube video made about a year ago against ISIS by Hamza Yusuf, one of the most prominent Islamic scholars in America, has been viewed by close to half a million people around the world.

Some Western pundits claim that ISIS is winning the war of ideas against the West. This leaves most of us Muslims scratching our heads. Really? Exactly where is this happening? Certainly not in our mosques where we have called ISIS by what it is: a terrorist organization that has nothing to do with Islam and that must be destroyed.

Yet it is also true that some young and vulnerable American Muslims have fallen prey to ISIS’s slick social media campaign for recruitment. (A recent Danish intelligence report states that the typical age range of foreigners joining ISIS is 16 to 25.) One such was Northern Virginia’s 17-year-old Ali Shukri Amin who was sentenced to more than 11 years in prison last August for helping another teen travel to Syria to join the fight there. In acknowledging his guilt, Amin also stated that when he sought advice about the war in Syria from the adults in his life, including imams, “they could not provide adequate answers” or seemed “too busy to try.”

One could make the case that Amin was unlucky because many American Imams have been counseling disillusioned youth planning to travel to Syria to reconsider their decision. One such is Imam Mohamed Magid of Sterling, Virginia, who was able to persuade several youths from his congregation to abandon their decision to join ISIS simply by asking them to “use your mind.”

So while we Muslims condemn the Paris attack, we must also take our youth seriously if they show signs of alienation and disillusionment with their lives and reason with them in ways that make sense to them, instead of being patronizing toward them.

A Marine's Take on Gun Control

In the aftermath of the horrific shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the issue of gun control has enraged, and engaged, Americans from all walks of life. Emotions are running high. It is clear that America’s gun culture has to change, and change soon, for the killings to stop.

As a former active duty Marine (and Marine for life), David Mauk, 23, has seen both sides of the issue. He was deployed in Afghanistan from late 2010 to early 2011. By maintaining a high moral ground, he and his unit were able to earn the trust of the local Afghans. “We did it by removing the improvised explosive devices (IEDs) from the path of villagers, even though we risked our lives to do it.”

David had witnessed an Afghan child who had struck an IED that shattered his legs. He had seen firsthand the work of cruel men and knew that, whatever the politics and issues, his job was to try to make the village safe for the teeming children. He and his unit did it with honor, integrity and respect for the local culture and customs.

The experience in Afghanistan taught him that saving the lives of children was among the noblest of callings. That’s why he was so traumatized by the killing of twenty children in Newtown. At the same time, “guns are an important part of my life and culture. They have many good uses, such as hunting, as in my home state of Missouri. Hunting keeps the deer population from overbreeding and destroying valuable farmland.”

Unfortunately, not everyone has the character, training, and responsibility to use a gun in its proper context. David has seen far too many instances where criminals and mentally-disturbed individuals use them for evil purposes.

His proposal to fix the violent gun culture in America consists of the following:

-          Completely ban military style or rapid fire weapons and magazines. No one outside law enforcement or military needs such power. Assault weapons are NOT effective hunting weapons. They are meant only to kill people. We don't need them.

-          Require stricter screening before allowing the purchase of firearms.

-          Require regular training and evaluation administered by qualified law enforcement personnel.

-          Require a more accurate system of licensing gun ownership, much the same way that a concealed carry license works.

-          Require ammunition to be regulated at least as closely as, say, alcohol. Ammunition is the real key. Different types of ammunition and quantities of it would indicate what it would be used for.

-          Finally, require gun owners affiliate with the militia, as the Second amendment intended, and then rein in the militias to fulfill the intended purpose of arming and educating citizens for the good of society. As it stands now, militias are breeding grounds for conspiracy theorists, anti-government extremists, and other threats to the free and secure society we seek to create in America.

David has just begun his college career. He is a student at San Jose City College. In his first semester, he is taking courses in English, Chemistry and Math. He wants to be a park ranger for the U.S. Forest Service or the National Parks Service because “I love the outdoors and want to educate people about the world they live in. People invested their time in me to develop a love for the outdoors. I want to pass it on.”

David never went hunting in Missouri because he couldn’t afford all the equipment. He did, however, work with a conservation department at an animal rehabilitation center, where he learned that much of a conservationist’s job was to keep the animal population in check. “It is a fact of nature that animals hunt and kill each other. Sadly, because we hunted the predators to near extinction, the job now falls upon us. I have never been comfortable with this cruel fact, but at least I understand it. What I cannot accept is how easily high-powered guns can be bought in America. In particular, close-range assault rifles - preferred by criminals and mentally-ill people because they are so obscenely easy to use - are meant only to kill people. Why we allow people to buy them is beyond me.”

“I fought for this country so that we could have peace and freedom, not so I could come home to see people killing each other. In Afghanistan, my mission was to protect the civilians and neutralize violent radicals so that the Afghans might have a safe place to bring up their children. My mission is turned into a mockery when I come home to find disturbed individuals murdering children with military weapons.”

 

Missing the Real Obama

I do not believe, as many Americans do, that Barack Obama has fizzled in his first year as president. But I do believe that he could have done better than what he has, given the support and the goodwill that propelled him to his historic victory in 2008.

Let’s first put the Massachusetts election in context. Republican Scott Brown’s victory over Democrat Martha Coakley for the late Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat does not signal a seismic shift in the political landscape of America. It simply means that Coakley, who ran the most inept and asinine campaign in recent memory, lost to the better and more knowledgeable candidate. Brown may derail the health care reform bill and tarnish Kennedy’s legacy but that will not imply that the Republican Party has suddenly become resurgent and is poised to sweep away the Democratic agenda. In fact, Brown’s victory might just be the wakeup call Democrats needed to stop their internal squabbles and get their bearing right.

But there is little doubt that the euphoria we experienced in the wake of Obama’s election as the first African-American president in U.S. history is rapidly vanishing. There are two main reasons for this: The President’s continuation of his predecessor’s policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his inability to turn the economy around.

We have just reached a dubious milestone: The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have topped $1 trillion in taxpayers’ money since 2001, and the President is expected to request another $33 billion to fund more troops in 2010.

To put this in context: 20% of all Americans are either jobless, underemployed or simply have given up looking for work. One out of every eight U.S. mortgages is in default or foreclosure, one out of every four homeowners is burdened with underwater mortgages, and one out of every eight Americans is on food stamps. Hunger and homelessness are on the rise and relief is nowhere in sight.

The stimulus package has not removed or reduced the stress on homeowners and job seekers. The economic “wizard” in Obama’s cabinet continue to spin the fantasy that the recession, at least in their formula-rich spreadsheets, is over. Meanwhile, at least six Americans are responding to each job opening, even if they are over-qualified for it.

Greg Mortenson, author of Three Cups of Tea and Stones for Schools, has built schools in the remotest areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan. In his many meetings with hardened Afghan warriors, Mortenson came away with one simple message: education is the best antidote to the Taliban. As journalist Trudy Rubin has reported, the title for Stones Into Schools came from a hardened former mujahedeen commander in the remote Badakshan province of Afghanistan who talked about how much his country needed rebuilding. He told Mortenson that there has been far too much dying in these hills. “Now we must turn these stones into schools.” Even warriors want peace, says Mortenson, a lesson he learned by sitting down repeatedly with shuras (representative gatherings) of elders. He says one of the biggest American problems after the 2001 invasion was the lack of such attention paid to what Afghans themselves wanted. We should have consulted with shuras, and listened to, and respected, elders, according to Mortenson.

Most Americans desperately want President Obama to succeed. One rising concern is that Obama has lost touch with his dedicated and passionate supporters. He has to renew his connection with the grassroots. Many Americans are beginning to view his presidency as imperial and catering to the wealthy. This perception has to change.

A constant in the calculus of American politics is that the presidency changes the President. Some it elevates, others, it drags down. Here’s hoping that, in spite of recent setbacks and falling poll numbers, Barak Obama will quickly find his stride and decisively place himself in the first group.

Missing the Big Picture

One of the profound paradoxes of life is that the average person can see through an issue with a clarity that eludes the best and the brightest.

Such is the case with deploying more troops to Afghanistan. What exactly is the strategic importance of Afghanistan to the United States at this time? The Soviet empire has collapsed, so there is no question of any contest for supremacy there. A reminder for Iran to behave and Pakistan to crack down on the Taliban? Questionable. To stop Al-Qaeda from returning to that graveyard of empires? What a laugh!

Yet our leaders and military commanders continue to act as if saving Afghanistan from Osama Bin Laden and warring warlords will translate into making the world safe for democracy.

What would happen if America were to withdraw from Afghanistan or reduce its footprint? Tom Friedman of the New York Times offers this analysis: In the Middle East, all politics happens the morning after the morning after. Be patient. Yes, the morning after we shrink down in Afghanistan, the Taliban will celebrate, Pakistan will quake and Bin Laden will issue an exultant video. And the morning after the morning after, the Taliban factions will start fighting each other, the Pakistani Army will have to destroy their Taliban, or be destroyed by them, Afghanistan’s warlords will carve up the country ..."

Judging from nationwide polls, this seems to be how many Americans feel. Yet President Obama is weighing requests by his top military commanders to send more troops and deepen America’s involvement in Afghanistan. Given his penchant for consensus, the president will probably not send as many troops as requested but overall, is likely to prolong the war there. Note that by 2010, America will have been in Afghanistan longer than the Soviets were in their catastrophic attempt to bring the country under their control.

Consider another perspective by Nicholas Kristof, also a columnist for the New York Times. “One of the most compelling arguments against more troops rests on this stunning trade-off: For the cost of a single additional soldier stationed in Afghanistan for one year, we could build roughly 20 schools there. It is hard to do the calculation precisely, but for the cost of 40,000 troops over a few years – well, we could just about turn every Afghan into a Ph.D.”

Kristof also notes that “Greg Mortenson, author of Three Cups of Tea, has now built 39 schools in Afghanistan and 92 in Pakistan — and not one has been burned down or closed."

So there you have it. But an “expert” may say, “Well, these guys are not on the ground. They are armchair generals, as most of you are, so you really don’t understand the complexity and that’s why you offer these simplistic solutions.

Not quite. Consider Matthew Hoh, the Foreign Service officer and former marine captain, who resigned from a civilian post in Afghanistan this week to protest U.S. policy. We can’t win, he said in his resignation letter, and our presence is only fueling the insurgency. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

Indeed, why and to what end? The stark truth: There is none. Yet the cost in lives and wasted resources in Afghanistan are beyond calculation.

And democracy? Impartial observers have confirmed that Hamid Karzai stole the recent election and that his brother has been on CIA's payroll all along. “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

We return, then, to the paradox: How is it that the smartest brains cannot see the forest for the trees, particularly when their claim to fame is that that’s precisely where they tower above you and me?

Is it because power and an inflated sense of self blind one to the obvious? Can it be because they think that the fate of the world depends on them and that their decisions today will change the course of history tomorrow? Or is it because they are such believers in technological superiority and manifest destiny that they have become immune to history’s lessons?

Humility and a sense of the big picture seem to be missing from our leaders and commanders. The solution: heed the wisdom of the average citizen, do not be goaded into prolonging this war by the exhortations of rabid right-wingers, and know that history keeps its own timetable, indifferent to the might and machinery of mere mortals.