Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Jihad: A War On Terror Or A Clash Of Civilizations?

From RCP comes this essay: World War IV As Fourth-Generation Warfare by Tony Corn.

Mr. Corn served as a political analyst at the U.S. embassies in Bucharest, Moscow, and Paris, and in public diplomacy at the U.S. Missions to the EU and to NATO in Brussels. He is currently the Course Chair of Latin Europe Area Studies at the U.S. Foreign Service Institute.

It is a lengthy, but in-depth and thorough examination of the structural components of this theo-political phenomonen, known as jihad. It is not for those that have Attention Deficit Disorder.

The essay speaks for itself, but I would like to call attention to these two excerpts:

...precisely because this insurgency within Islam is an insurgency, the terrorism paradigm — with its traditional focus on the criminal nature of the act and its exclusion of the political dimension — is largely irrelevant, save at the tactical level. The West is no more at war with terrorism today than it was at war with blitzkrieg in World War II or revolution during the Cold War. The West is at war with a new totalitarianism for which terrorism is one technique or tactic among many.


Whoa! Read that carefully.

This is not just a war on terror. It is an ideological war that uses terror, as one method of meeting its objectives. The enemy would love nothing more than to have all of us believe that this is merely, a war on terror.

From the point of view of threat assessment, the much-discussed theological distinction between a greater (spiritual) and lesser (physical) jihad is utterly irrelevant, and the only thing that matters is the praxeological distinction between three modalities of jihad as practiced: jihad of the sword, of the hand, and of the tongue.

Today, the most effective jihadist networks are precisely those that — from Hamas to Hizbullah — have combined these three modalities in the form of urban warfare, relief work, and hate media.

In short:

1. Urban Warfare = Terrorists

2. Relief Work = Muslim Charities

3. Hate Media = al-Jazeera, CAIR, and even the MSM

All three have the same goals and objectives. Only the methods are different. Until these things are properly recognized, the war cannot be fully won.

I highly recommend reading the rest of this article.

7 comments:

mississippimud2007 said...

We have never been in a "war against "terror" we are fighting Islam, period. "Terror" is the tool of the enemy, not the enemy itself. It's good to see bloggers out there that realize this fact.

G_in_AL said...

I think we are fighting the political machine using Islam to get what it wants. The days of taking land and Empire building are over. But in this world, power doesnt need acres, power needs political influence. The islamic nations are seeking power and influence. I think the islam tie in is just a convienent method to bind the aggressors together.

WitNit said...

Good-un. Thanks for the tip!

All_I_Can_Stands said...

From the article:
"the State Department as an institution appears unable to make the transition from a bureaucratic to a strategic way of thinking."

Bureaucratic is such a benign word to describe what I think is more heinous. The state dept is bureaucratic, but it is also awash with liberal, socialist, world-view thinking that often harms the US cause rather than just failing to help.

Good post and link. The attention defecit disorder almost kept me from getting to the finish line :)

Always On Watch said...

Excellent find, LA.

Jihad is one method, perhaps the most visible one, of achieving the worldwide caliphate. There are other methods as well.

You singled out a supremely important point: The West is no more at war with terrorism today than it was at war with blitzkrieg in World War II or revolution during the Cold War. The West is at war with a new totalitarianism for which terrorism is one technique or tactic among many.

G_in_AL said...

all we are saying.....

Esther said...

Well said, G.

AICS, excellent point. I believe (though my memory might be fuzzy) that the KGB was very successful in placing people at the State Dept. Those people in turn continued to hire "like-minded" folks so whether they realize what's going on or not, I think that could be a big reason the state department sucks as much as they do. That and the fact they're in bed with the oil companies (therefore with Arabs).