Killing the Snake

Killing the Snake

Defeating the Islamic Extremists

Copyright 2011 by Perry Jones

(A Draft)

A counterinsurgency strategy is based on an understanding of the underlying causes of that insurgency. Attriting the existing members of that insurgency will not defeat the insurgency. Overturning the governments which seem to support or assist insurgency will not defeat the insurgents. In fact, both of these actions may radicalize those individuals not currently aligned or supportive of the insurgents and increase the number of insurgents available to the cause.

A primary underlying cause of insurgency is the ideology of those believing in the goals and aims of that cause. An ideology cannot be defeated with weapons or occupation of “enemy” territory; the weapons in play are ideas, the locations are every nation, city, village and home in the world.

One of the first acts in defeating a conventional enemy is to cut off the enemy’s ability to communicate. This eliminates the ability of the enemy to control and command his elements in the field leading to disorganization and mislocation of those elements. This leaves those elements vulnerable to attack and elimination.

The act of cutting off the insurgent’s ability to communicate may prove effective at a global level; the worldwide leadership, financial support and ideological recruitment on a mass scale would be eliminated. This will not eliminate local leadership, financial support or recruitment. These actions will continue regardless of how many “terrorist” nations are occupied or how many terrorists are killed.

Muslims believe that Islam is a superior ideology, it is not just a religion, it is a way of life which filters and colors every aspect of Islamic society. In the West, democracy is a form of government which separates religion from the state and empowers the individual over their leaders. Western women are not beholden to men, the people are not beholden to their leaders who govern and the faithful are not beholden to their clergy. In Islam, these roles are reversed. Democracy is a bottom up way of life, Islam is a top down form. In democracy, control rests with the people, in Islam, control rests with the leadership. And that is the fundamental difference. It is also the key weakness.

The objective of a leadership is to conserve or expand their power; every contrary belief, ideology or government is a threat to that power and therefore must be countered and vigorously opposed. The radical mullahs and imams are following this role exactly.

Around the world, the extremists are spreading their ideology of hate and vitriol. They shout slogans meant to inspire and enrage. They paint the western world as evil, with the leader of the western world - the United States – as the “great Satan”. With the interconnectedness of the worldwide web, the radical extremists themselves are deeply intertwined as a den of snakes is intertwined. Cutting their communications separates the snakes, but does not kill them.

Over the last several years, we have seen that one strategy to counter terrorism and aggression will be ineffective; to convince the enemy leadership that hostile actions on their part will spell defeat rather than victory. The mullahs and imams are convinced of their eventual success and are willing to die to achieve it. When one is captured or killed, another steps up to take their place, the ideology is not diminished, their war effort does not stumble, it continues essentially unchanged.

We must find another means of leverage rather than the weapons of war and the hypocritical foreign policy we now follow. We must convince the Islamic leadership, all of them, that aggression against the West will spell the end if Islam. Alternatively, we must convince the leaders and the Muslim people that the true nature of Islam seeks to abide in peace and cooperation with other states and religions.

In Nazi Germany, Hitler’s followers and war machine were constrained by geography; the geographical field of battle for radical Islam is the world. With Nazi leadership, there were a few who held power and maintained their ideology. With this power, they convinced their people that their worldview was accurate and true. Using media and mass meetings they informed their people of the ills of their enemies focusing the attention and anger of their people against their enemy fanning the flame of their rage. The mullahs and imams are following this same strategy. Using mosques, madras, mass media and worldwide communications, the radical leadership convinces their people of the evils of the Western world. They convince people that the Western world’s politics is evil, our economy is evil, our culture is evil, our foreign policy is evil, our disparate religions are evil and our liberalization of women and education are evil. These are points which cannot be easily countered as they appear accurate from one point of perspective. We can believe that our culture, politics and religions and the separation of church and state are superior, but from the point of view of the Islamic world, they are not.

Strategies for Defeating the Extremists

The extremists believe they are serving the wishes of Allah, they understand that Allah is the guiding force and principle that drives their ideology. With this single statement, we see the key to defeat the Islamic extremists.

There are two methods we can employ to win this war. Or, perhaps, we can employ both to some degree. The first is that, if the imams and mullahs believe Allah is their guiding force, is encouraging them and approving of their actions, (and they do) we must convince them that Allah is not. We must convince the extremists that Allah is opposed to violence, that Allah is opposed to the forced introduction of Islam into nations and communities that do not currently have an Islamic following and that Allah does not support the denigration of spirit or the continued illiteracy of the individual. And we must convince the extreme mullahs and imams that Allah will punish those who support violence, radicalism and extremism in the name of Islam.

A second method is to educate, employ and advance the common Muslim into an understanding of a world that has no place for violence, destruction or hatred and to convince the everyday Muslim that a personal policy of peace, education, hard work, entrepreneurship and honesty and integrity is the fastest and surest path to assure the achievement of the stated tenets and goals of Islam and of their own and their families benefit.

Islam is a great and peaceful religion which can peacefully and cooperatively coexist with other religions and non-Islam states. This is the heritage and history of Islam and we must remind the Muslim people of this historical legacy of Islam.

In pursuit of method one, we must place doubt in the minds of those who lead and direct the extremist movement. We must position Western trained and/or progressive Islam viewing imams, mullahs and Islamic scholars in two positions in Islamic society. One position is as a key advisor to those who make the decisions. These people must be willing to sacrifice their lives and die at the hands of their own people or Westerners because their cover will be so deep, no one will know who they are. As key advisor, they should relay doubt on decisions and actions of the decision makers by asking “would Allah really approve?,” by quoting surahs from the Quran which show an alternative to that decision, by identifying hadiths and historical actions which will benefit the cause of peace and by the continuous application of doubt about hostile actions and encouragement for peaceful actions.

The second position for these progressive individuals is within their communities. As university professors, doctors, lawyers, school teachers, local authorities, judges et al, the impact these progressive individuals can play in their communities can be substantial. Their influence will not only be contained within their community, but as their message filters out into the general population, it will eventually circle the globe. These progressive individuals must also view themselves as potential martyrs for a more peaceful world. As visible promoters of a progressive Islam within their communities, their safety and security can, perhaps, be addressed but not assured by Western military and intelligence actions.

In either case, identifiable contact between these individuals and any Western military, intelligence or even perhaps any Western person may compromise their position and undermine their influence.

In pursuit of method two, wherever possible, schools for the school age and training centers for those above school age should be established. The world has entered into a new economic period and the old style of economics has failed. A new style of personally integrated economics emphasizing personal financial responsibility must be established. Self sufficiency in homes and communities must be encouraged. Individual entrepreneurship must be encouraged. A job is no longer a guarantee of income and has never been a guarantee of future financial freedom or a source of individual empowerment. Literacy, Islamic and world history, mathematics and creative artistic studies must be encouraged in each school and training center. Islam must be encouraged to embrace the potential of the individual, not to suppress it.

Neither of these two methods will end this war overnight or even in a year or two. Both will take time and perhaps even a decade or more. In the meantime, we must protect our homeland without abrogating our rights, encourage peace without sacrificing our principles and promote change without losing our heritage. The battle will not be easy but it can be won. This war will require persistence and determination perhaps over many years, but we won the Cold War, we can do it again.