Losing the War
by Joe Sobran

(Expanded from SOBRAN'S, January 2003, page 1)

{{ Material dropped or altered  solely for reasons of
space appears in double curly brackets. }}


     On Thanksgiving Day, suicide bombers blew up an 
Israeli-owned hotel in Kenya, killing a dozen people. At 
the same time, terrorists fired shoulder-borne anti-
aircraft missiles at an Israeli airliner taking off from 
the nearby airport, narrowly missing it.

     Al-Qaeda was suspected of being behind the 
coordinated attacks, as well as an earlier bombing in 
Bali that killed 200 tourists; but nobody can really 
know. Terrorism is a game any number can play, and only 
the players themselves know who they are. They may be 
loosely related Islamic fanatics rather than a single 
organization, more on the model of a Mafia than a state. 
Militant Islamists are now known to be proliferating in 
unlikely places, such as {{ South America's Triple 
Border, }} the lawless area where Brazil, Argentina, and 
Uruguay meet. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs have 
migrated there in recent years.

     What seems most unlikely is that the terrorists in 
Kenya had anything to do with Iraq -- the target of 
President George W. Bush's "war on terrorism." Westerners 
are only beginning to understand the turmoil in the 
Muslim world, and Bush doesn't seem to grasp it at all. 
Jonathan Raban, writing in the SEATTLE TIMES, reports 
that the Islamists bitterly hate the Arab states Bush 
persists in seeing as the problem; they dream of a huge 
Muslim empire, a restored caliphate, without internal 
borders, under Koranic law. They regard the Arab states 
as artificial creations of Western imperalism (which they 
are) and they consider their rulers "usurpers" who have 
betrayed Islam. Raban notes that Osama bin Laden's 
messages never refer to Saudi Arabia by name, since he 
doesn't recognize it; in fact, few Arabs have any loyalty 
to what the West thinks of as "Arab states."

     This means that Bush is taking aim at the wrong 
target. It may be deliberate on his part. Sensing that he 
can't defeat al-Qaeda -- and can't even find it -- he may 
have chosen a more palpable enemy who can easily be 
scapegoated and defeated, one Arab villain serving his 
purpose as well as another. That way he can claim to be 
winning his war, thereby satisfying the public 
expectation that he "do something about terrorism." And 
forgetting his own words when he said that this is "a new 
kind of war."

     Since the 9/11 attacks, al-Qaeda has been strangely 
quiet. If the Kenya attacks were its work, it's rather 
surprising that it took so long to get around to using 
cheap anti-aircraft missiles against passenger planes. 
Even a few such operations could destroy the precarious 
airline industry and make tourism virtually a thing of 
the past.

     {{ What gives? Has bin Laden run out of resources 
already? That seems doubtful. Is he biding his time with 
patient determination -- waiting, perhaps, for a real 
Arab-American war to begin in Iraq, inflaming the whole 
Muslim world and setting the stage for his next big 
strike against the West?

     {{ And what might such a strike be? It would 
probably involve more than box-cutters. There are new 
rumors that he has been buying small nuclear weapons from 
former KGB men in Russia. A few of his "martyrs" in 
London, Paris, or Washington could bring suicide bombing 
to an unimaginable new level. }}

     At first it seemed that a "war on terrorism" could 
be neither won nor lost. Al-Qaeda and its allies could 
never defeat the U.S. military in direct combat, but they 
were too elusive and diffuse for the U.S. forces to 
destroy. That assessment may prove too optimistic.

     {{ If the Islamists can destroy one major Western 
city, that will be that. The "war on terrorism" will be 
lost. }}

     Perhaps Bush should be preparing a contingency plan 
for surrender -- but to whom? "To whom it may concern"? 
Could we even be sure that a surrender, in the event, 
say, of the destruction of Paris, would be accepted? Or 
would the enemy take out a few more cities for good 
measure? Bush clearly hasn't thought through such 
possibilities. He has been madly confident of victory 
from the start, with no conception of what defeat might 
be like. He still thinks he is fighting his father's war.

     {{ A decade ago, Francis Fukuyama announced "the end 
of history." And a happy ending it was, with "democratic 
capitalism" triumphant all over the world. What we may 
face now is something like the literal end of modern 
Western history. And it won't be happy. }}

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read this article on-line at 
"http://www.sobran.com/losingwar.shtml".

To subscribe to the Sobran's, see 
http://www.sobran.com/e-mail.shtml or 
http://www.griffnews.com for details and samples
or call 800-513-5053 or write fran@griffnews.com.


Copyright (c) 2003 by The Vere Company, 
All rights reserved.
This article may not be reprinted in print or
Internet publications without express permission
of The Vere Company.