Will democracy end jihadism, or enflame it?

The bloodcurdling threats by Iran’s president that Palestinian attacks on Israel “will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world,” and that any Muslim country that recognizes Israel “will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury,” bring home a reality that never seems to have occurred to our leaders. The building of a democratic government in one Muslim country does not necessarily trigger a rush to liberalism or democracy in neighboring Muslim countries. In fact, it may trigger just the opposite: increased jihadist fervor. And isn’t it evident why this should be so? Islam and democracy are incompatible. Islam demands a government ruled by God and his spokesmen, not a government based on popular elections and individual rights. For the leading democratic power on earth to set about spreading democracy in the Muslim world is the most direct existential threat to Islam in the 1,400 years of its existence. It’s only to be expected that at least some Muslims and Muslim countries, far from moving in a liberal direction in response to this alien intrusion, would react against it with all the force of their being, as we can see in the endless terror insurgency that has been set off by our occupation of Iraq.

Now what I’ve just said—that spreading democracy in the Muslim world may exacerbate the forces of radical Islam, not quiet them—is at least a reasonable possibility, is it not? It does not take great brilliance or specialized knowledge to see this, right? Yet there is no indication that this reasonable possibility has ever once been seriously considered by President Bush, his advisors, or his chorus of supporters in the conservative movement. Instead, Bush et al. just keep repeating their bland assurances that democracy and peace are the inevitable wave of the future for Islam and mankind, so long as we “hold the course.” And so, in classic liberal fashion, they vastly worsen the problem they are trying to fix.

But what is my solution, you may ask. Very simple. That we not attempt to transform Islam, which inflames Muslims, but instead contain Islam while threatening and targeting for destruction the specific regimes and entities that endanger us and our allies, beyond that taking no interest in Muslim societies’ internal arrangements. But what about a higher ideal, you ask. How can we get people to do what we want without an ideal, such as democracy? The fact is that there is no ideal of ours that can become truly effective in the Muslim world. What Muslims need to hear from us is not our idealism, but our determination that we will act ruthlessly in our own defense, destroying any regime that threatens to harm us, our friends or our interests. That is the language that Muslims will understand. And—something inconceivable to the liberal mind—Muslims will be far less provoked by such firm language than by all our hollow arrogant preaching about democracy.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 26, 2005 11:49 PM | Send