The Muslim view of war and the 'cease fire'
Israel's leaders still don't get it. If the Obama administration gets it, they're even more conniving than most of us have given them credit for being. As far as Hamas and the residents of Gaza are concerned they won last week's war. The proof is that they dictated the terms of surrender
How would ibn Hazm,
the great Muslim theorist on war, understand the ceasefire between
Israel and Hamas? He probably would have believed -- as, most likely, do
his modern day co-religionists -- that the Israelis were afraid to
destroy Hamas's leadership.
Ibn Hazm wrote: "When at war, show your enemy no mercy, but when you
have him at your mercy, you must give him breathing room but you dictate
the terms." The loser has no say in the terms; only the victor has.
The terms of this agreement allow Hamas to live another day, re-arm
and fight again. To the Muslims, this is a sign that Israel does not
have either the ability or the will to make them surrender. Israel and
its allies have thus proven to the Arabs, Turks, Iranians, and other
Muslims, that Israel is weak and, for whatever reason, is incapable or
unwilling to do what is necessary to subdue its enemies.
The current agreement emboldens Israel's and America's enemies. It
gives them the emotional fortitude to fight on. Unless Israel destroys
Hamas's leadership once and for all, it can expect many more years of
terrorists showering death and destruction on its population. These
Islamic terrorists are consequently inspired to think that America and
other Western allies are easier targets for more Islamic fundamentalist
Where does America fit into this picture? Muslims have a deep belief
that all non-Muslims are united against the Muslims; people are either
Muslims or non-Muslims. According to a classic Arabo-Islamic principle:
"Unbelief is one nation". That means that all Muslims belong to one
"nation" and all non-Muslims belong to another, united against the
Muslims. Many Muslims therefore have difficulty making a distinction
between Americans and Israelis, both members of the same non-Muslim
Many Muslims also believe that America pressured Israel to accept
this ceasefire. In Muslim eyes, this means that non-Muslim America did
not stand by its natural non-Muslim ally, Israel. America as an ally is
therefore unreliable. If America would not even support its fellow
non-Muslim ally, how can Muslims, such as, say, the Sunni Saudis, rely
on the US to protect them from their existential enemy, Shi'ite Iran?
The Saudis can only conclude that they have no alternative other than to
seek different, less feckless, allies such as China or Russia to
protect them from the Iranian regime. America, they likely recall,
refused to support its ally, the Shah, against Khomeini, and thus
America lost Iran as a great ally. It also quickly abandoned its ally
Egyptian President Mubarak. Will America lose the Saudis as well?
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Islam, Operation Pillar of Defense