Defining Victory

     George Bush drew a lot of flak in the last presidential campaign for saying the War on Terror could not be won. He was quickly forced to “clarify” his remarks by saying that it could not be won in the “conventional sense.” I think he was right without the qualifier. Individual terrorists can be hunted down and killed or captured but the Islamic extremism that inspires them will live on until enough Muslims decide to stop allowing hate filled rhetoric in their Mosques and madrasas. Lash out as we may; only Muslims can change the conditions that produce terrorism. The best we can do is help the process along.
     It seems to me the idea that the invasion of Iraq was a distraction from the more important pursuit of Osama bin Laden is really an argument that when he is captured or killed the war will be over. I subscribe to a different view. Bin Laden didn’t start this war; he is a product of it. He came to prominence in the aftermath of the Soviet rout in Afghanistan and the chaos that put the Taliban in power. That gave rise to the renewed notion among many Muslims that it is God’s plan for them to complete the world conquest left unfinished by Arabs in the 8th century, and by Ottoman Turks in the 17th. Their goal is the subjugation of all the world’s non-Muslims. Bin Laden may be their most important symbol but when he is gone someone will step up to take his place. This will continue until the idea loses credence in the Muslim community at large.
     Taliban defeat in Afghanistan was a body blow to Islamic militants but not a knockout. That bin Laden remains at large gives them hope of resurgence, so it is important that he be removed. I just don’t think that we will be able to call it winning. The insurgency in Iraq is another beacon of hope. If they can beat Americans there, force them to withdraw in ignominy as the Russians did from Afghanistan, God will be back in the field. If not, if a reasonably strong government emerges in Iraq, one that is on friendly terms with the U.S and can provide its own security, it will cause a lot of Muslims to question whether God is behind this after all. It has caused a lot of them to question it already. If God were leading this army how could they be suffering so many losses?
     The best single argument against the whole idea has got to be the Arab Israeli conflict. After eight decades of unremitting terrorist campaigning punctuated by at least three all out wars Israelis have gotten only stronger, Palestinians only weaker. The one real hope Palestinians have of ever gaining supremacy is demographic. If they one day outnumber Jews in a democratic Israel they will be able to vote themselves into power. Jews have to hope that by then economic realities and the rule of law will protect them. It could happen but the level of thugery still dominating Palestinian politics is not encouraging. Arab capacity for self destruction seems to have no bounds, witness the trashing of greenhouses in Gaza after the Israelis withdrew.
     A number of outspoken Muslims have begun to point this out, and not just in Palestine. They believe proselytizing is the way to spread Islam. Terrorism gets in the way.  As their influence grows, Islamic jihadists will decline. In the meantime we really need to make sure a rag tag band of extremists doesn’t produce another superpower rout.