HUMINT: Bending Identity

www.humintel.blogspot.com ^ | 29 OCTOBER 2006 | humint

[humint]

HUMINT: Democratization is about bending Identity. This work refers specifically to US and Coalition democratization efforts in Iraq and the Middle East in general. As liberators, Americans can only provide the conditions by which liberty can grow and eventually thrive. One articulation of what is occurring across the region may be that Americans have demonstrated they can "bend" the political environment of the Middle East but cannot directly bend the identity of Middle Easterners. If social change is introduced externally it is reasonable to assume that any changes of the individual identities of Middle Easterners will lag behind that change. Instances of terrorism and despotism from the newly liberated is of little consequence to the democratization process as long as the political environment is sustained until the guarantee of individual liberty becomes the socio-political norm. If the democratic environment is not sustained, their pre-liberation identity will be reinforced and therefore validated.

HUMINT: The election of members of the terrorist organization Hamas to seats of power in the Palestinian territories, and members of the terrorist organization Hezbullah in Lebanon were setbacks in terms of bending the identities Palestinian and Lebanese citizens toward democracy but it was a step forward with respect to a democratic political environment in which they live. One day democratic tendencies will be the norm across the region. The transitional phase is a toll that must be paid before sustainable peace can be achieved.

HUMINT: To be sure, the Middle East is a culturally heterogeneous environment whose parts have little to do with the political boundaries familiar on maps. Oddly, the nationalism that does exist in the Middle East is often the product of brutal dictatorships. Saddam, through the commission of atrocities, forced Iraq to behave as a nation of Iraqis. As democracy strengthens there, a peaceful political process will replace the iron fist as the force that holds Iraq together. But what of the elements that are ripping Iraq apart?

HUMINT: It is absolutely astonishing that the sign carying, uniform wearing representatives of militias in Iraq are not considered targets for Coalition Forces in this war. Ralph Peters makes a valid point in his essay, Kill Muqtada. If the elected officials of Iraq make choices that drive the country away from democracy and peace they have to pay for their transgression with their lives. If these traitors to the new Iraq are not targeted, then the entire exercise has been a costly mistake. The power vacuum will be filled by the most vile enemies of the United States and from their Iraqi safe havens they will be able to sustain strikes against American interests around the world.

HUMINT: So is the answer to build big walls around our troops in the deserts of Iraq and let the militias slaughter freshly trained Iraqi police? I don't think so. In my opinion, the opposite needs to occur. Coalition forces should be as integrated with the Iraqi people as they reasonably can be. The Iraqi people are the coalition's best ally and to separate them from coalition forces could have terrible repercussions for sustainable democracy in Iraq.

HUMINT: With the introduction of available command and control communications technologies, primarily to prevent friendly fire, US troops might consider dropping their uniforms (not body armor) in favor of Iraqi attire. In uniform and on patrol, coalition forces are regularly subjected to ambush tactics. It is conceivable that undercover US troops might be able to instead, ambush insurgents.

HUMINT: Civil society is not only possible in the Middle East, it is probable. Islam is not an obstacle but fascist interpretations of it are. The individuals who hold an anti-democratic interpretation of Islam should be considered prime targets. In the case of Muqtada Alsadr and the Mehdi Army, obstacles to democratization have presented themselves time and time again but each time, the obstacle is confronted without being removed. The behavior is more like police craft than war craft and is ultimately self defeating.

HUMINT: Tactically speaking the US should revisit the practice of castle warfare (people and troops inside the walls) and begin facing off with their enemies in Iraq as though they themselves were an indigenous tribe. It will take two steps backward to take three steps forward. For coalition forces to seriously consider bending the identity of Iraq toward democracy, we are going to have to have some flexibility of our own - temporarily anyway.

SOURCE EXCERPTS

1. Update on Iraq

Ambassador David Satterfield, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State and Coordinator for Iraq - October 26, 2006

[EXCERPT] AMBASSADOR SATTERFIELD: Your first question, yes, we do strongly support Prime Minister Maliki and his national unity government. We look to that government; we look to Prime Minister Maliki, as the President made clear yesterday, to lead. We understand fully the very difficult circumstances that attain in Iraq today and we understand fully just how difficult the decisions are which the Iraqi leadership, which the Iraqi Government has to take. Difficult decisions on security, difficult decisions on political reconciliation, but these are critical decisions and they must in fact be confronted. They must be decided. Now, these decisions are all for the Iraqi Government, the sovereign Iraqi Government to make. We respect their sovereignty as the President made clear. But they're decisions that cannot be deferred without cost to the Iraqi people and the interest of a stable peaceful democratic Iraq.

Our role as the United States, our role as a lead member of the coalition, is to support the Iraqi government, support that Government's security forces to ensure that they have all of the tools that we can help provide for them to lead their country forward. But the decisions on the future of Iraq, on the political process, on security must be taken ultimately by Iraqis themselves. We do look to Prime Minister Maliki to take these decisions. We do have confidence in his leadership.

On the issue of the Mecca declaration, we think that the gathering together in Mecca under OIC sponsorship was an extremely important step. And we are very appreciative both to Saudi Government officials and to the Organization of the Islamic Conference leadership for helping make this possible. It's important that as many messages of reconciliation as possible be sent to the Iraqi people; that it be made as clear as possible that there is no legitimate violence against innocent Iraqis; that there is no excuse or justification for the killings of innocents, no matter from what source. And this was an important step in that process and we see it as a part of process, both on the political and on the religious side of addressing the question of how do you get to a peaceful Iraq. How do you bring sectarian violence to an end? How do you bring about ultimately an end to the presence of armed groups, militias, armed gangs that are responsible for so much of this violence?

2. Civil Society in the Middle East v.2

By Augustus Richard (EDT) Norton - Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993 [EXCERPT]

3. Islam and democracy: Survey shows what Iraqis want

By Diane Swanbrow - News Service - January 2006

[EXCERPT] More than three-quarters of Iraqis support a democratic political system, but they are divided on the role Islam should play in their country's government, according to a U-M study. The research shows 51 percent favor a strong link between government and religion and 49 percent prefer a secular political system. The findings, published in the January 2006 issue of the Journal of Democracy, are based on a survey of a representative area probability sample of 2,325 Iraqis conducted in November and December 2004 with funding from the National Science Foundation. The survey was carried out in collaboration with the Baghdad-based Independent Institute for Administration and Civil Society Studies.

4. Kill Muqtada

by Ralph Peters - Heritage Foundation - October 27, 2006

[EXCERPT] Our soldiers and Marines are dying to protect a government whose members are scrambling to ally themselves with sectarian militias and insurgent factions. President Bush needs to face reality. The Maliki government is a failure. There's still a chance, if a slight one, that we can achieve a few of our goals in Iraq - if we let our troops make war, not love. But if our own leaders are unwilling to fight, it's time to leave and let Iraqis fight each other.

5. In Iraq, Stay the Course - but Change It

by Daniel Pipes - New York Sun - October 24, 2006

[EXCERPT] My solution splits the difference, "Stay the course – but change the course." I suggest pulling coalition forces out of the inhabited areas of Iraq and redeploying them to the desert. This way, the troops remain indefinitely in Iraq, but remote from the urban carnage. It permits the American-led troops to carry out essential tasks (protecting borders, keeping the oil and gas flowing, ensuring that no Saddam-like monster takes power) while ending their non-essential work (maintaining street-level order, guarding their own barracks).

HUMINT: NOTE - Two format changes introduced in this work are 1. My commentary is above the commentary of others. In the past, my writings have gone beneath the writings of other authors. 2. Until this post, my source material has been mostly news items, quotable comments from officials and article length commentaries. In the future, source material will be intentionally diversified - to include material pre 9/11/2001 - books - and my own speculative analysis. Source diversity appears a reasonable way to marry the daily dynamics of the Iraq War to philosophical, ideological, historical, religious and relevant points in order to produce informed political commentary.

[GSlob]

It's full of heresy and blasphemy. Civilizational identities [aka Huntingtonian civilizations] are extremely resilient - that's why there have been so few of them. They are not bendable, but with difficulty could be destroyed [it takes a genocidal bloodbath, like early spread of Islam or the creation of Spanish colonial empire].

[humint]

i've been reading your posts here on FR and considered your thoughts both valuable and interesting... Please consider sharing your high octane ideas on what I've written above. Alternatively, please accept my apologies if this unsolicited ping annoys you. Let me know if it does and I'll not repeat this transgression again. If anyone would like to be added to the list, you know the drill.

~humint ping~

[humint]

GSLOB: It's full of heresy and blasphemy. Civilizational identities [aka Huntingtonian civilizations] are extremely resilient - that's why there have been so few of them. They are not bendable, but with difficulty could be destroyed [it takes a genocidal bloodbath, like early spread of Islam or the creation of Spanish colonial empire].

HUMINT: I disagree with Huntington on many levels. I think he underestimates the potential of American culture when facing adversity - which we can expect more and more of... Look at the progression from Revolution, Civil, WW1 and WW2. Americans are redefining the ways of war and culture every day. Huntington's cultures are static targets that will be flattened by the exponential successes of American culture we are witnessing around the world. Huntington is giving tribalism far too much credit.

WIK: Huntington also argues that the widespread Western belief in the universality of the West's values and political systems is naïve and that continued insistence on democratization and such "universal" norms will only further antagonize other civilizations. Huntington sees the West as reluctant to accept this because it built the international system, wrote its laws, and gave it substance in the form of the United Nations. Huntington identifies a major shift of economic, military, and political power from the West to the other civilizations of the world, most significantly to what he identifies as the two "challenger civilizations", Sinic and Islam.

[backtothestreets]

I hold out no hope for democracy in Iraq, nor any other Muslim land that lacks a strong authoritarian oversight. Even Turkey, the most democratic of societies in the Muslim world has been dependent on occasional military coups to restore an authoritarian presence before restoring democracy.

Add to that my concern history showed us that democracy in strongly split populations gave rise to Hitler in Nazi Germany and Mussolini in Fascist Italy. All I see is great trouble on the horizon. This is especially troubling considering the Nazis rose to power in Germany with little more than 30% of the popular vote. Democracy was only achieved after the most radical elements had been killed during the war, or executed after the war.

If the present Iraqi government collapses or proves itself inept to govern, it would be a good time to consider appointing a strong Amercan Governor-General to Iraq, much as we did after taking possession of the Philippines from Spain. It could be decades before Iraq is prepared to undertake full democracy, if at all.

[Valin]

I hold out no hope for democracy in Iraq, nor any other Muslim land that lacks a strong authoritarian oversight. Even Turkey, the most democratic of societies in the Muslim world has been dependent on occasional military coups to restore an authoritarian presence before restoring democracy.


Malaysia & Indonesia, Where in the last elections the Islamist parties got their heads handed to them.

[GSlob]

"Malaysia & Indonesia, Where in the last elections the Islamist parties got their heads handed to them. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1728005/posts - malaysia.
Bali bombers getting Ramadan amnesty and bashir getting kid gloves treatment - indonesia. 'nuff said.

[GSlob]

"Look at the progression from Revolution, Civil, WW1 and WW2. ..."
I'm afraid you have not given yourself the trouble of understanding Huntington. In short, the life of society could be divided in three areas: economics [self-evident]; culture [the most amorphous - cuisine, architecture, song and dance, arts, and pottery shards] and sociology - how people in that society relate to one another and to their groups in socially important situations. This encompasses how that society exists and self-perpetuates as a distinct sociological entity. "National character", weltanschauung, and major religions belong right here, but only in their sociological aspects. Huntingtonian civilization is the pure sociology, and nothing else. While Huntington used the whole religion as a convenient marker, such clarification is indeed implicit in his thesis, for he did not split the Western Civ into several Protestant civs and a Catholic civ.
Now, returning to the start: do not mistake the economical/technological progression for the civilizational one. In civilizational terms there has been a regression of multiculturalist variety.

[humint]

Now, returning to the start: do not mistake the economical/technological progression for the civilizational one. In civilizational terms there has been a regression of multiculturalist variety.

First, my analysis is not supposed to be a silver bullet. I wrote it mostly as a response to an earlier post of my own, HUMINT: Studying Amara. My suggestions apply mostly to areas of Iraq that are under the worst fire.

Second, Huntington adds value to this debate but at a stratospheric level. Listening to Iraqis muslims (Iraq the Model) who already think and articulate themselves democratically, I can say with confidence, they don’t need to be bent. It is those prone to despotism and violence that need bending or they need to be bled to death.

Third, if you’ve ever been the leader of a small group of people with a clear mission, it is not conducive to that mission to kill your weakest members. You set your pace to them and move forward. Only when they defect do you attack them, not before. We have allies in Iraq who are willing to join us in a peaceful democratic future but they are moving slowly in that direction. Mostly because of the very difficult threats they face every day.

[humint]

backtothestreets: I hold out no hope for democracy in Iraq, nor any other Muslim land that lacks a strong authoritarian oversight. Even Turkey, the most democratic of societies in the Muslim world has been dependent on occasional military coups to restore an authoritarian presence before restoring democracy.

humint: Machiavelli was equally as pessimistic about the future of Europe. Unfortunately our timetable cannot afford centuries or even decades. In one sense your world view must be bent, in order to accommodate new possibilities. The alternative you are so confident will come to pass is a long and bloody alternative… You must realize that we ultimately define our collective future with our collective perception of the present. Every day events shape our perception of the present. If we don’t look beyond the bomb blasts to glean more nuanced realities, we will be mired in blood and fire with the terrorists forever.

[backtothestreets]

"Malaysia & Indonesia, Where in the last elections the Islamist parties got their heads handed to them."

Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (monarch) ultimately names the prime minister from the elected members of the lower house of parliament.

Indonesia has but eight years of democracy since the 1998 Revolution forcing an end to three decades of authoritarian rule. How democratic Indonesia addresses the small, but growing presence of Islamic hardliners, especially the violent Jemaah Islamiyah linked to Al Qaeda, since the 1998 Indonesia Revolution will tell if democracy survives there.

[GSlob]

At less than stratospheric level you get bogged down in detail and will not see the forest for the trees. The forest is best seen from an airplane, if not from the stratosphere. Secondary, [Iraq] a society organized along the tribal and sectarian lines cannot be made democratic for as long as it is organized along the tribal and sectarian lines. Democratic societies are individualistic. And the eradication of tribal and sectarian infrastructure - a necessary democracy prerequisite - would take a bloodbath on the scale surpassing Katyn forest, but functionally similar to it.

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for the ping. Have been tied up past few days in not having a phone service, serious problems on my PC use to access internet, as well as on and off power blackouts in my area while not at work. So I had not been until short time ago even able to access FR.
I will read all our FR's comments thus far. I doubt I can add much to what has already been voiced and debated.

[Valin]

How democratic Indonesia addresses the small, but growing presence of Islamic hardliners, especially the violent Jemaah Islamiyah linked to Al Qaeda, since the 1998 Indonesia Revolution will tell if democracy survives there.

Yup! Also if they can do something about the systemic coruption.
(for what it's worth I try to keep an eye on Indonesia and Malaysia too for that matter.)

[Valin]

I suspect A PLOT! You never know when THEY will strike.

[Marine_Uncle]

It would be naive to think we could eliminate all Islamic terrorist in the future. Some will always be plotting to do some harm to a non-Islamic state.

[Valin]

It would be naive to think we could eliminate all Islamic terrorist in the future.
they'll never be eliminated, I mean the KKK is still around. But they have been marginalized, and that's what will happen to the terrorists.

The radical loser (Long Read)
Der Spiegel ^ | 1/12/05 | Hans Magnus Enzensberger
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1694568/posts

I excerpted this very long article. Once you get through the psycho babble, the writer actually makes some very good points.

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks Val.

[Marine_Uncle]

BINGO!
"There is also no mistaking other similarities, such as the fixation with written authorities. The place of Marx and Lenin is taken by the Koran, references are made not to Gramsci but to Sayyid Qutb. Instead of the international proletariat, it takes as its revolutionary subject the Umma, and as its avant-garde and self-appointed representative of the masses it takes not The Party but the widely branching conspiratorial network of Islamist fighters. Although the movement can draw on older rhetorical forms which to outsiders may sound high-flown or big-mouthed, it owes many of its idées fixes to its Communist enemy: history obeys rigid laws, victory is inevitable, deviationists and traitors are to be exposed and then, in fine Leninist tradition, bombarded with ritual insults."

Sort of sums up the whole deal within the context of modern radical Islamic movements.