Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Far more thoughtful and, inevitably, depressing is Richard Cohen's Return to Wannsee. I'll quote some as an inducement for you to click on the above link:
The use of such language, the support of such ideas, is too often a precursor to violence. The scenario of Germany and the rest of Europe cannot apply. Islamic countries have next to no Jews. But it does transform the opposition to Israel from a political-nationalistic dispute into a kind of vast pogrom in which compromise becomes increasingly impossible. In the end, such language could justify the use of the so-called Islamic bomb, an atomic weapon such as the one Iran is now developing and Pakistan already has.
Cohen fittingly frames this in the context to a visit to the Wannsee villa where the Holocaust was planned.
My own reaction to Mahathir is some profound doubt as to who and where the moderate Muslims the West needs to cultivate are. The classification of Mahathir as a moderate is clearly erroneous and wishful; that has been apparent since he decided to deem the Iraq war proof that the US opposes Islam. Embracing bin Laden's language should have ended notions of his moderation then and there.
Still, there were moderates in the room and they standed and applauded. Hamid Karzai was one. Megawati Sukarnoputri was another. I doubt that either of them intend to act in a way to undermine the US war on terror, or pour fuel on the flames of conflict in Israel and Palestine, but at the least the world does need individuals to speak up within these forums.
The point has been made that Mahathir was calling for nonviolent resistance, but he did so by reassuring Muslims that a vendetta against "the Jews" was justified, by reaffirming an intensely warped worldview. A Klansman hailing the contributions of whites to science and calling for more research and less cross-burning seems an apposite analogy.
Still, I'm inclined to view this event as a helpful reminder of the ideological currents that circulate in the Islamic world. The normally blasé Europe was compelled to condemn the outburst; Germany did so quickly, France stalled as long as possible. The world - so much of it in denial - needs these reminders every now and then. There is a certain reluctance to speak about prejudice that doesn't emanate from conservative white men; this does noone any favors. We can give the Palestinians 100% of the West Bank tomorrow, but it wouldn't mean anything if we let this particular cancer continue to metastasize.
The use of such language, the support of such ideas, is too often a precursor to violence. The scenario of Germany and the rest of Europe cannot apply. Islamic countries have next to no Jews. But it does transform the opposition to Israel from a political-nationalistic dispute into a kind of vast pogrom in which compromise becomes increasingly impossible. In the end, such language could justify the use of the so-called Islamic bomb, an atomic weapon such as the one Iran is now developing and Pakistan already has.
Cohen fittingly frames this in the context to a visit to the Wannsee villa where the Holocaust was planned.
My own reaction to Mahathir is some profound doubt as to who and where the moderate Muslims the West needs to cultivate are. The classification of Mahathir as a moderate is clearly erroneous and wishful; that has been apparent since he decided to deem the Iraq war proof that the US opposes Islam. Embracing bin Laden's language should have ended notions of his moderation then and there.
Still, there were moderates in the room and they standed and applauded. Hamid Karzai was one. Megawati Sukarnoputri was another. I doubt that either of them intend to act in a way to undermine the US war on terror, or pour fuel on the flames of conflict in Israel and Palestine, but at the least the world does need individuals to speak up within these forums.
The point has been made that Mahathir was calling for nonviolent resistance, but he did so by reassuring Muslims that a vendetta against "the Jews" was justified, by reaffirming an intensely warped worldview. A Klansman hailing the contributions of whites to science and calling for more research and less cross-burning seems an apposite analogy.
Still, I'm inclined to view this event as a helpful reminder of the ideological currents that circulate in the Islamic world. The normally blasé Europe was compelled to condemn the outburst; Germany did so quickly, France stalled as long as possible. The world - so much of it in denial - needs these reminders every now and then. There is a certain reluctance to speak about prejudice that doesn't emanate from conservative white men; this does noone any favors. We can give the Palestinians 100% of the West Bank tomorrow, but it wouldn't mean anything if we let this particular cancer continue to metastasize.
