In a recent post, we said that the Jihadists were engaged in Holy War, while the other side was waging a war-of-no-particular-rationale. It turns out that this is perhaps not quite true. Here is Donald Rumsfeld from an annual security conference in Munich, via Reuters:

Rumsfeld said that the world needed to prepare itself for a long fight against Islamic terrorists who he said wanted to set up a global Islamic empire. “They have designed and distributed a map where national borders are erased and replaced by a global extremist Islamic empire,” he said. “As during the Cold War, the struggle ahead promises to be a long war.”

Our reaction was: we want to see that map. So we went looking (but so far have been unable to find it). What we did find by searching islamic empire map rumsfeld is a further elaboration of the dimensions of the Islamic empire, this one via Terry Jones in the Guardian:

The president claimed that in the second world war, the forces of freedom defeated the ideology of fascism. In the cold war, those same forces defeated communism. “Today, in the Middle East, freedom is contending with … terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al-Qaida,” whose ultimate aim is to “establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain”.

With a simple piece of unnoticed elision, George Bush has recreated the crusades. Rumsfeld and Cheney can rest assured that the arms industry will flourish for years to come. The west has a new enemy: Islam.

The phrase “totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain” is from the President’s November 30 address in Annapolis, which we quote a little more fully (we also suggest that you re-read the statement later, substituting Iran for Iraq):

Their objective is to drive the United States and coalition forces out of Iraq and to use the vacuum that would be created by an American retreat to gain control of the country. They would then use Iraq as a base from which to launch attacks against America and overthrow moderate governments in the Middle East and try to establish a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain. That’s their stated objective. That’s what their leadership has said.

In the snippet used by Terry Jones in the Guardian, he omitted the President’s reference to Iraq, to imply that Bush was launching America into a New Crusade. This seemed unfair to us. However, in these matters, it is often wise to appreciate how your foes understand you. For that we turn to frequent Nation of Pakistan correspondent (and possible IJT radical) Tahir Akbar:

The word that now sits on the tongue and is the keynote of every speech of the US administration is the Khilafah. Eric Edelman, US Under-Secretary of Defence for policy, made reference to the Khilafah in December (2005) before a roundtable at the Council on Foreign Relations. He said “Iraq’s future will either embolden terrorists and expand their reach and ability to re-establish a caliphate, or it will deal them a crippling blow”. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a speech on 05/12/05 in Washington, stated, “Iraq would serve as the base of a new Islamic caliphate to extend throughout the Middle East, and which would threaten legitimate governments in Europe, Africa and Asia. This is their plan. They have said so. We make a terrible mistake if we fail to listen and learn.” He then followed this with another reference to the caliphate only three days later on Thursday 08/12/05 in an interview on PBS. Before this, Stephen Hadley, the US National Security advisor, referred to the Caliphate in October 2005 in speeches in New York and Los Angeles while General John Abizaid, the top American commander in the Middle East, during hearings on Capitol Hill in September said, “They will try to re-establish a caliphate throughout the entire Muslim world.” As for US President George Bush, though he has not used the term publicly, nonetheless he has repeatedly described the Caliphate as, “a totalitarian Islamic empire that reaches from Indonesia to Spain.”

So what has ruffled the feathers of the American administration so much that they find the need to incorporate the word caliphate (Khilafah) as part of their daily briefings? It is not connected to the issue of Al-Qaeda or terrorism – as the US and its ‘War on Terror’ would want the world to believe. This is a red herring which a number of political scholars and former government officials have taken strong issue with, likening it to the period of ‘McCarthyism’ where the US conducted witch-hunts against communist in the 1960’s during the Cold War. What is apparent is that the desire for the return of the caliphate amongst the Muslims globally is gaining momentum and becoming a deep conviction. It is evident also that the US administration, like many other leading capitalist states and their cronies in the Muslim world, have sensed this growing conviction, desire and political mobilisation amongst the Muslims towards establishing the caliphate. Therefore it was both inevitable and obligatory for the US administration to discredit the Islamic system of government with the aim to alienate both the Muslims and indeed their own populations from the caliphate and its system of government. The Muslims should take heart from this. That within the walls of the White House, Downing Street and the like – resonate with discussions about the caliphate, clearly indicating that this is not just a dream or utopian ideal but a reality that sits on the horizon and increasingly shakes the thrones of governments in the east and west. Such discussions indicate that the West acknowledges the inevitablity of the Caliphate and is only working to delay its return. The return of the Caliphate is simply a matter of time. Since its destruction in 1924, the obligation to work in re-establishing it again remains the most vital issue for Muslims. And by Allah’s will, it is only a matter of time when the announcement will be made heralding its re-emergence in the Islamic world.

Terry Jones and Tahir Akbar both have a point. A war precisely to prevent a global Islamic empire or caliphate is a close-enough replay of a Crusade (with George Bush in the role of Pope Urban II), even if the West’s intention is utterly secular. Actions speak louder than words.

The secularism of the West’s Crusade is peculiar, but it is not the most peculiar element of the War. It is certainly true that the West has to defeat the theology of millenarian Islam by destroying the hope of a global caliphate, but the West is not trying to convert Muslims to Christianity. Rather, the West is seeking to empower the amorphous group referred to as “moderate Muslims” within their own religion.

The empowering of Moderate Islam requires not only obliterating the hope of a caliphate, but also the West’s being a model of standing up against the bully boys wherever the Islamists challenge Western values. The Cartoon controversy is very important in this regard. What expectation can the West have for moderate Islam to triumph if the West will not defend its own value of free expression? Why should we expect voices of dissent and moderation to triumph within Islam if the West bows and scrapes to the demands of Islamic thugs, rather than telling them to shut up and sit down? Cartoons may or may not offend, but the absence of free speech kills — not only us but those we count on as potential allies within Islam itself.

Super fun bonus

At the top of this piece we referred to Don Rumsfeld’s appearance at a Munich security conference. In response to his remarks on terrorism and war, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin and Howard Dean issued this joint statement:

“Rumsfeld had better try to act responsibly for the disgrace of attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, because the people of the world will never forget the torturing of the prisoners of Abu-Ghraib…”

Oh wait, that was Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar. Oops, sorry!

UPDATE

Thomas Lifson has some related thoughts on the Moderate Muslims over at the American Thinker.

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 4th, 2006 at 10:44 am and is filed under EU, General, Left of Left, Religion, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.