Powered By Blogger

Friday, April 15, 2011

The Clash of Civilizations, Al-Qaeda’s Clash with the West

In an article written in Foreign Affairs, Samuel P. Huntington proposed a theory for foreign relations that he called “The Clash of Civilizations”.[1] In his article, he laid out six reasons why clashes occur between civilizations. First, differences among civilizations are real and basic to our humanity. Civilizations differentiate in their history, language, culture, tradition and most importantly in their religion. Second, the world is becoming a smaller place through forces like globalization, putting people of different civilizations into contact with one another. Third, the process of economic modernization and social change throughout the world are separating people from their longstanding identities. Fourth, the growth of a civilizations consciousness is enhanced by the dual role of the West. The West is at the peak of its power and because of it, there are pushes to return to the roots of the civilization occurring in non-western civilizations. Fifth, cultural characteristics and differences are less mutable and hence less easily compromised and changed. Sixth, economic regionalism is increasing and different economic blocs have developed. Huntington went on to argue that if a civilization wanted to redefine itself three things must be present. First, the political and economic elite must be generally supportive of the move. Second, the public must be willing to acquiesce in the redefinition. Third, the dominant groups in the recipient civilization must be willing to embrace the conversion. This clash of civilizations model will show why enmity has developed between al-Qaeda and the West and why there is an ideological crisis in Islam.
Differences Between Civilizations  
A central part of al-Qaeda’s worldview is the notion of archetypes.[2] Al-Qaeda uses the Crusades as an archetype for the West’s “invasion” into the Middle East. Al-Qaeda interpreted the Crusades as the West’s attempt at territorial expansion and the destruction of Islam. This archetype was confirmed by the United States and Europe’s continual support of Israel’s occupation of Palestine. Just as the crusaders sought to control Israel, al-Qaeda views the West as continuing the mission of the Crusades, control of Israel and the death of Islam. History is repeating itself. Just as the Muslims were victorious during the Crusades they will in turn be successful in the current crusade that the West has launched on Islamic lands.
 Another central archetype for al-Qaeda was the Soviet Afghan war. Al-Qaeda got its roots in the jihad against the Soviets invasion of Afghanistan. Because of god’s assistance, they were able to defeat the Soviet Union, leading to the collapse of one of the world’s superpowers. Al-Qaeda then turned to the other superpower in the world, the United States, and hoped for a similar outcome. They thought it would be easier to defeat the Americans because of the archetype that they had established of the United States as a paper tiger. They looked at the United States withdrawal from Somalia and Vietnam[3] as proof of America’s cowardice. They believed that by striking the United States on September 11, 2001 one of two things would happen based upon the history between the two groups. One, America would do absolutely nothing as they had done following the USS Cole incident in 2000 or they would launch missile strikes on al-Qaeda training camps as they did following the bombings of the United States Embassies under Clinton. However, this was a grave miscalculation and a false archetype, as al-Qaeda would soon discover, and it would cost them their home base of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda was forced into self-protection mode deferring attacks of the same scale as the September 11, 2001 attack. [4]  
The theology behind Islam contains Five Pillars. The first Pillar is the Shaddrah or confession that there is “no god but god and Muhammad is his prophet”. The second pillar is the Selat or prayer done five times a day in the direction of Mecca. The third Pillar is the Zakat or giving to the poor a tithe. The fourth Pillar is the Siyam or fasting, done particularly at Ramadan. The fifth Pillar is the hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca, to be done at least once in ones life if one has the means to do it. Some have argued that jihad is the sixth Pillar of Islam and therefore essential for all Muslims, even some who are not radicals. Jihad has an internal and external component to it, usually with the internal being more important than the external. Jihad can be divided up into four parts: jihad of the heart (obedience in life), jihad of the mouth (witness in words), jihad of the hands (deeds) and jihad of the sword (war).[5] Jihadists typically overemphasize jihad of the sword, even though the Hadith, one of the holy books of Islam, calls it the lesser jihad. Jihad of the sword had an offensive and defensive component and could only be declared by the Caliph during much of Muslim history. The problem became that with the fall of the Ottoman Empire the Caliph position no longer existed. The question then became who can declare a jihad and when a jihad could be declared. Most Muslims argue that there must be a physical invasion into a Muslim territory for a defensive jihad to be declared and only leaders of Muslim countries can declare it. The only offensive jihad should be missionary work. However, jihadists have argued that any influence in the Muslim world constitutes a defensive jihad, whether it is ideological or physical and an offensive jihad is a possibility, all of which can be declared by any rightly guided Muslim.[6]
This jihadist ideology developed mainly in the medieval period from several scholars. The first of these scholars was Ibn Taymiyyah[7] who believed that Muslims could not live in lands ruled by infidels, Muslims must follow Shar’ia as interpreted by scholars, and Muslims must fight apostates and unbelief. Ibn Taymiyyah’s views would influence Muhammad Ibn Abd-al-Wahab[8] who expanded upon Ibn Taymiyyah’s views. He argued that Muslims should learn to think for themselves and not just follow the Caliph’s leading. Central to his view is the tawhid, which is divided into three pieces, God’s Lordship, Worship, and Name. God is supreme and He has no associates; therefore, anyone who tries to play God is an apostate. Since God is the lawmaker through His Shar’ia, anyone who makes their own law falls into apostasy. No human can be prayed to or bare the name of God. God alone is sovereign, not states or people, therefore anyone claiming authority over another become an apostate. Muslims are slaves of God and serve Him only, however, in this slavery is true freedom. True freedom is found in God alone and is therefore not derived by man. Wahabian thought had an influence on the Islamic awakening at the end of European Imperialism in the Middle East. A third thinker, Muhammad Rashid Rida[9] adopted Wahabism and argued that Muslims should stop attempting to imitate the infidels, while some changes could be made, Muslims should not become like the unbelievers. 
            Hassan al-Banna[10] was another key thinker in the jihadist movement. He redefined nationalism, capitalism, socialism and feminism into Islamic terms. He saw the West as an intellectual and physical threat. He had a strong emphasis on the unity of Muslims and emphasized the importance of a proper Islamic education and lifestyle. In this area, he called Muslims back to Islam. He called faithful believers to participate in jihad against unbelief, driving unbelievers from Muslim lands and pursue them to their lands, not necessarily to kill them but to guide them to the truth. He created the Muslim Brotherhood, a cross-national party that did not engage in political life instead concerned themselves with livelihood of Muslims by providing education and basic welfare to those in need. HAMAS split off from the Brotherhood and became a violent presence in Palestine. Another break off was Sayyid Qutb[11] who believed that only through violence can the Brotherhood’s goals be reached. He provided a new interpretation of lordship, jihad and ignorance (to include Muslims not following Shar’ia). He argued for an intellectual and physical combat with non-Muslims and apostates.                          
            Mawdudi[12] argued that Muslims should attempt to revive Islam peacefully but jihad will eventually be essential for Islam, as violence will eventually become necessary. He argued that Muslims must battle with liberalism and modernity and saw the West as rotting away under these ideologies. Components of these thinkers would form the basis for al-Qaeda ideology but was not accepted by the vast majority of Muslims today. This disagreement has lead to conflict within Islam as to how to react to Western ideology. Islam itself is divided between several groups the majority fall into Sunni and Shiite camps but others are Sufi, Kharihites, and very few are part of the radical organizations responsible for the terrorist attacks. Therefore, there is not only a clash between the al-Qaeda civilization and Western civilization but also a clash within Muslim civilization itself because of the differences in religion.
Islamic civilization of legalism, morality and theology is contrasted by the West’s secularism. Al-Qaeda attacks the United States social and economic structure on several fronts.[13] First, because they believe Islam is the only true religion they call Americans to convert to Islam. Second, they call Americans to live moral and upright lives. This means ending the separation between church and state and implementing God’s law, the Shar’ia. They call America to end usury in the economy. They call Americans to stop using drugs and other intoxicants. They call America to practice sexual purity noting President Clinton’s repeated lapses on this account. They call America to end gambling in all of its forms including Wall Street investment. They call America to stop exploiting women in the media and other mediums. They call America to end sex trades including prostitution and pornography. They blame Americans for the spread of AIDS and other diseases because of its corrupt morality. They call America to step up its efforts to protect the environment and stop caving into companies that pollute. They argue that it is the wealthy ruling the country, in particular, the Jews that control the policies, media and economy. They also question America’s morality in using nuclear weapons and other war tactics that kill noncombatants. They call Americans to end the hypocrisy that they see in American foreign policy. They argue that while West says it stands up for democracy, but it has placed tyrants in charge of the Middle East and fought against the rise of democracy in Algeria. They argue that America has a double standard as to who gets Weapons of Mass Destruction when in fact the only ones to use them is the United States. They argue that America has broken many international laws and treaties including at Guantanamo Bay and committed several war crimes in Somalia, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. They see these moral lapses infiltrating the Middle East and corrupting longstanding Islamic civilization. As much as these demands were directed at the United States, it was also directed at other Muslims, to argue that they do not want to become like the West because of the lapse of morality in the region. Al-Qaeda and many other Muslims do not want to see the Middle East states adopting what they see as negative attributes of Western society particularly in terms of morality and economic structure. Al-Qaeda does not want to see aspects of Western Civilization penetrate into Islamic Civilization.
Interaction of Civilizations
The ideological conflicts between the West and al-Qaeda/Islam are only amplified by the increased interaction between Islam and the West because of the foreign policy decisions of the United States and other Western nations. One of the best examples of this was the creation and support for the state of Israel. Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people was seen as an attack on Islamic grounds. Al-Qaeda used this to justify its declaration of a defensive jihad. They justify the declaration, first, because they interpreted it as Jews taking over and ruling Muslim territory. Second, it was seen as a Western military base and gateway into the Middle East. Third, it created an ideological controversy between liberal democracy (man made forms of government) and Shar’ia (God made government).[14]
Another point of contact between Islam and the West was the West’s military presence in Saudi Arabia. After Iraq invaded Kuwait, Bin Laden and his group of Mujahidin offered its services to the Saudi royal family to protect Saudi Arabia. However, the royal family instead accepted the United States offer for protection. The United States had troops stationed in Saudi Arabia from 1990 to 2003. In the eyes of al-Qaeda, it was infidels that were protecting the two Holy Masques and not Muslims, which they took as an insult to Islam. Not only was it infidels, some of them were women that were protecting Muslim men in the country, which only exemplified the insult.  The Saudi royal family was therefore apostate rulers because they let the United States protect the country and allowed them to steal Muslim’s natural resources, particularly oil, because the price was too low. Bin Laden saw many of the leaders of Muslims states as puppets of the West and were therefore apostates.[15]
  There are also several less important negative points of contact in the West’s interaction in the Middle East including, the West’s use of sanctions in Iraq, which Bin Laden argued led to   thousands of Muslim deaths in the country, the bombings in Qana Lebanon, and the deaths of many non-combatants in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. All of these things point to a general theme for al-Qaeda that the West was trying to destroy Muslims.[16] While the West publicly states they support life and liberty, they support Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians. While the West states they support democracy, they place in power tyrants to do its bidding. While they state they favor freedom of religion, Muslims across the Middle East have been targeted and killed by the Zionist-Crusaders. Who are the real terrorists in this picture? In the history of the world, only one country has used nuclear weapons, a weapon that inevitably killed thousands of noncombatants. Al-Qaeda killed a few thousand American noncombatants in retaliation for all the harms done to them and they become terrorists. Americans have developed a double standard that gives Americans more worth than the hundreds of thousands of Muslims that had died at the hands of the West.
Overall, the West has come into closer contact with Muslims in the Middle East and it has resulted in enmity felt by both sides.  The big bully, the West is trying to further its national interest in the Middle East and al-Qaeda and other groups refuse to take it any longer, establishing a clash of civilizations between al-Qaeda and the West. Muslims are therefore left with a choice to resist the West or to submit to the West. This is where the theology of the Muslims becomes paramount as to how they deal with the West. The conditions are such that the Western socio-economic ideology separates the people from their longstanding identities. 
Separated from their Identity
With the rise of globalization Muslims have begun to move into Western lands in search for a better life. However, Western societies, particularly European states, have not been the most receptive of Arabs in the society.[17] Certain policies that are in place in Europe make it difficult to fire someone. Therefore, many Europeans are reluctant to hire immigrants because of the risk involved in hiring usually an under educated and culturally different prospect. The United States tends not to have this problem because the United States has more ability to manage who gains access into the country. The United States can than accept only the educated Muslims who have a better chance of becoming part of American civilization. Another important distinction to make is that in the United States, people subscribe to a notion of an American Dream. This is the myth that everyone can make it in America and go from rags to riches. No such dream exists in Europe and therefore leads to the belief that there is no hope for immigrants in Europe. Muslims in Europe tend to feel ostracized from the rest of society because they cannot find employment nor do they have the hope of becoming successful in Europe. This feeds the notion that the Europe is at war with Islam among European Muslims contributing to their radicalization. This is less the case in the United States because of the immigration restrictions and the myths that the United States has about living the American dream. The radicalization process can happen anywhere, however, there are certain facilitators to this process including anything particularly anti-Islamic like burning the Qur’an or portraying the prophet Muhammad in cartoons by Westerners. Muslims feel separated from their identities and are unable to find new, Western identities in Europe.
The secularism of the West and toleration for what fundamentalist Muslims see as corruption and immorality has begun to infiltrate Islamic lands much to the disgust of fundamentalist Muslims. The Taliban[18] were particularly resistant to the secular influences of the West. They therefore enforced strict Muslim dress. Women wore burkas and veils, which was seen as a way of protecting women from being seen and used as sex objects like they are in the West. Women do not need to care about their appearance because they are completely covered in public. They banned all music and other media devices to protect the people from being influenced by the West and thereby preserve Islamic culture. Punishments for breaking the Shar’ia law was often physical beatings but it could be worse based on the severity of the crime. While it did isolate the culture to some extent, it also turned many people against the movement as well.
On the opposite side of the pendulum of Islamic civilization is the country of Qatar[19], which serves as head quarters for the al-Jazeera network. People flock to Qatar from Saudi Arabia because Qatar allows drinking and sexual license, things that are prohibited in Saudi Arabia. The oil and natural gas reserves in Qatar have allowed Qatar to have the second-highest per capita income in the world. While it still has a ruling family, since 1999, it has become a constitutional democracy with a legislative branch. Adult citizens, including women, are eligible to vote in the elections. Qatar is a Sunni state and recognizes the authority of the Shar’ia that even the king must keep. Therefore, Qatar tries to find a balance between Westernization and Islam.
Back to the Roots
Each of the Islamic civilizations resists the Western civilizations influence to a certain extent. However, the Taliban and al-Qaeda are the most resistant to the Western civilization.  Al-Qaeda and other groups call Muslims to return to the way of Muhammad.[20] Muhammad was the first Caliph and ruler over all of Islam. During his rule, issues developed that he had to deal with and think about. Therefore, it made sense that much of Muhammad’s thoughts in the Qur’an centered on issues pertaining to government and how to rule. Much of the religion itself centered upon a connection between Muslims and government. Especially for the more radical factions of Islam there is no separation between state and religion, they are a unit. This made the fall of the Ottoman Empire hard on Muslims as they struggled to find their identities. The majority of Muslims westernized and slowly adopted some European ideology. However, a more radical faction sought to purify Islam by going back to core principles. They argued that God’s law must be supreme and God must be the ruler of Muslim grounds and not the infidels. Anyone who tried to make laws or rule the people was trying to play God and therefore not an apostate because they defied the lordship of god principle developed by earlier thinkers mentioned above. They believed that the Caliphate failed because Muslims and their rulers were not pure and true Muslims but had fallen into the House of Disbelief. It should be noted here the hypocrisy of al-Qaeda itself with regard to the tawhid by holding for itself the power to determine who are genuine Muslims rather than God alone. Nevertheless, Bin Laden and al-Qaeda see themselves as archetypes of the Prophet Muhammad as they try to recreate Islam out of nothing. Bin Laden had his own hijrah or migration in his quest to form Islam. After having his citizenship in Saudi Arabia stripped following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, he settled in Sudan from 1991 to 1996 and established a Mujahadin or warriors much like Muhammad did in Medina. After he was expelled from Sudan, he traveled to Afghanistan where previously he had fought the Soviets. In Afghanistan, he was able to establish a safe haven under the Taliban and was able to assemble and purify himself through his adherence to Shar’ia law as they argued Muhammad did in Medina. Afghanistan was seen as the only Islamic country because it was the only one that implemented true Shar’ia law. Because they thought it was obligatory for Muslims to live under Shar’ia, they called all Muslims to travel to Afghanistan. However, conditions in the country were far from hospitable. Women had no rights, music and all drugs including tobacco and alcohol were prohibited. Living under such conditions did not appeal to many Muslims. While most Muslims appreciated al-Qaeda standing up against Western oppression, most Muslims did not agree with the theology of al-Qaeda or the implications of its theology.[21].Nevertheless, al-Qaeda sees the movement as going back to the roots of Islam in opposition to the West’s growing influence in the region.  
Mutability of Civilization
Al-Qaeda is not simply going to concede or give up. Bin Laden and his group are prepared to go down as martyrs for the cause. The only way for the United States to win the war with radical Islam is to win the people and future generations by making the radical view less appealing. Al-Qaeda assist the United States in this by making its views less appealing to most Muslims by its strict adherence to Shar’ia, however, the United States is not helping its cause with its foreign policy decisions particularly with regard to Palestine. The problem is that the battle is with a civilization that is itself divided. Islam has three holy books, the Qur’an, the Summa and the Hadith (deeds and sayings of Muhammad as told by people associated with him). As Muhammad ruled and assembled the Qur’an, he wasn’t always consistent. He explained that the new revelation was a better revelation for that particular situation.[22] In the Hadith, which was not written by Muhammad, there is debate between Islamic scholars as to which of the verses are inspired and which are not. Therefore, jihadists have minimized the importance of verses speaking about toleration of religions of the book, like Christians and Jews, as no longer applicable and instead emphasized verses speaking about jihad of the sword. They discredit the Hadith’s claim that it is the lesser jihad. Meanwhile the majority of Muslims use these verses to justify that Islam is a religion of peace and toleration. Each side has its key verses that it proclaims and believes its side to be right. Because it is not possible just to take out of the Qur’an verses used by jihadists to justify their theology, it becomes difficult to try to combat it with any particular policy as an outsider.
Economic Regionalism
While perhaps the least important factor in the clash of civilizations exhibited between the West and al-Qaeda, economics undoubtedly played a role. For years, Bin Laden and his supporters have boycotted American goods.[23] They have also sought to disrupt the West’s economic interests in the region. The West has an interest particularly in Saudi Arabia’s oil. Therefore, when Iraq invaded Kuwait the United States sent soldiers into Saudi Arabia to protect the oil. Saudi Arabia became the near enemy that al-Qaeda sought to defeat. However, in order to defeat the Saudi royal family, which they saw as the puppet government of the United States, they had to defeat the far enemy first, the puppet masters. After defeating the puppet masters, the puppets would have no legs to stand on allowing true Muslims to take over. Bin Laden argued that the United States had been stealing Saudi oil because of the low prices. Oil prices he thought should have been much higher and should never drop below a hundred dollars a barrel. Al-Qaeda therefore began to attack Saudi oil, nearly capturing major oil refineries in the region including the Abqaiq facility in February 2006.[24] Speaking more broadly about Arab states in general, the OPEC economic bloc as it pursues its economic interests tends to conflict with the West, which seeks cheap oil prices, stigmatizing the two sides on occasion. However, to al-Qaeda OPEC is just a puppet of the West.  
            The United States use of sanctions on Muslim countries like Iraq and Iran among others was also seen as a way the Western economic bloc seeks to control the Islamic economic bloc. However, this economic exchange has a particularly harmful effect on the people living in the country who depend upon the goods and services that are typically part of the embargoes.
The attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 was an attack on a symbol of America’s economy. Bin Laden calculated for every dollar al-Qaeda spent in the September 11 attack translated to 1 million dollars in American economy.[25] The attack by the most conservative calculations cost the United States 500 billion dollars but may have cost the country as much as a trillion dollars when considering the strain it placed on the economy by shutting down Wall Street, structural damages to the buildings and other miscellaneous costs. The costs of the United States conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq is quite high as the United States seeks to bring to justice those responsible for the September 11, 2001 attack.
Al-Qaeda Central to al-Qaeda the Social Movement
Al-Qaeda is a complex organization that itself has its own divisions. Al-Qaeda has went through three movements or waves in its struggle with the House of Unbelief.[26]  The first wave was during the 1980’s when companions of Osama Bin Laden, mostly Afghan Arabs around the age of 30 came together to make up the leadership of al-Qaeda Central. These were well-educated men like doctors and wealthy businessmen, however, they were not religious scholars by any means. Bin Laden called himself a Shiekh (or Islamic scholar); however, he did not have that authority in Islam. Of the first wave, a few dozen are left. The second wave went from the 1990’s to the September 11, 2001 attack. These men were fairly well educated and were trained in Afghanistan to carry out terroristic activity. They were younger with an average age of twenty-five and swore allegiance to Bin Laden making them part of al-Qaeda central. Hundreds in this group remain. Al-Qaeda then endured a transitional faze becoming a social movement following invasion of Iraq, which launched a third wave of Islamic terrorists that continues to the present. These groups had no connection with al-Qaeda Central but acted in al-Qaeda’s name to perform terrorist acts. Al-Qaeda in Iraq is an example of this type of group. Al-Qaeda in Iraq’s induction into al-Qaeda came after the fact. Those in this wave are mostly homegrown terrorist wannabes and represent the next generation of radical Islamic terror with an average age of 20. There are potentially thousands of Muslims in this wave remaining.
The war in Iraq turned metaphorically speaking al-Qaeda from a chicken into a Greek hydra. In other words, before if the United States could have eliminated Bin Laden and the inner circle the group probably would have danced around like a chicken with its head cut off but eventually died but now that al-Qaeda has become a social movement cutting off a head is not going to work any more because of the multiple heads that it has that are unconnected with each other. The only way it would appear now to fight the beast is to stop feeding it (more on this later).
The United States Historic Response to the Clash of Civilizations
Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations model established the main reasons for al-Qaeda’s attack on the United States. Thus far, the issues were presented mostly from the perspective of al-Qaeda. However, in order to get a firm grasp of the clash of civilizations, it is important to analyze the United States response to al-Qaeda. Following the bombings of United States Embassies in 1998, the Clinton administration launched air strikes of al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan.[27] They were unable to kill Bin Laden, however, continued to target al-Qaeda camps but never dedicated the resources needed to dismantle the organization. They also put pressure on the Taliban, the ruling party in Afghanistan, to deal with al-Qaeda and claimed that they would be responsible for any future attack by the organization. However, following the attack on the USS Cole in 2000 the Bush administration did not follow through on the threat to the Taliban, in fact they did absolutely nothing but renew the threat of violence on the Taliban.[28] This contributed to a false archetype in the minds of al-Qaeda that the United States was a paper tiger. Al-Qaeda then got bolder. In June, United States intelligence began to warn the Bush administration that an al-Qaeda strike on the United States was imminent. However, this message never communicated with the Bush administration who did not believe that the United States could be attacked on its home soil. The September 11, 2001 attacks came as a complete surprise to the Bush administration. Immediately, after he finished reading “My Pet Goat” to the schoolchildren, Bush began to look for a link to Iraq. Bush had a vendetta to settle with Iraq from the start of his term. One of the first things the Bush administration did in February 2001 was launch air strikes on sites near Baghdad, Iraq. These actions were universally condemned.[29] However, Iraq had no connection to the September 11, 2001 attack so Bush would have to wait to invade Iraq. Instead, the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan on October 7, 2001 until any shred of evidence or conspiracy theory developed that could link Iraq to the attack.
The Bush administration would argue that the reason al-Qaeda attacked the United States was because they “hate our freedom”.[30] However, nothing could be further from the truth. The primary reason for al-Qaeda’s attack on September 11 was due to the United States foreign policy in the Middle East. However, it was easier to convince Americans to fight for freedom than it was to fight for American interests in the Middle East. The mischaracterization of the problem to the American people has allowed the American government to continue its subversive policies in the Middle East in particular its support for Israel.
The Taliban and al-Qaeda were on the run. In December 2001, the United States had al-Qaeda leaders including Bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora.  They began bombing the area using bombs that would destroy the caves in which they were hiding. The problem however was that there was not enough troops on the ground to secure the boarders, particularly with Pakistan. In fact, there were more journalists in the area than military personnel. When al-Qaeda requested a cease-fire before their surrender in the morning, the Afghan troops that were fighting granted the cease-fire and refused to further penetrate into the region.[31] The United States observed the cease-fire for two hours then resumed the air strikes on the region. This was all that al-Qaeda needed to escape into Pakistan. The United States has not been able locate Bin Laden since this opportunity. 
The United States also took measures to try to protect itself from a future terrorist attack by passing the PATRIOT Act in 2001. This act improved the intelligence sharing between government organizations, created a no fly list, improved transportation security and improved intelligence-gathering techniques.[32] However, it is often criticized because it compromises some liberties with regard to communication between peoples and long delays at the airport along with rather personal examinations and limits on what can be brought on the plane. In part because of the PATRIOT Act, several terrorist attempts have been thwarted.  Nevertheless, like all things if someone really wanted to attack the United States there is always the possibility of it being successful no matter how strict the laws.
            In 2003, George W. Bush finally got his wish and the United States invaded Iraq under the heading of the war on terrorism. The reality of the matter is that al-Qaeda wanted to destroy all of the near enemies, the ruling parties in Arab states, including Iraq. Bin Laden and his group wanted to defend Saudi Arabia from an Iraqi attack. The point being, al-Qaeda and Iraq were fierce enemies. Iraq and other state governments could have actually been a close ally in the United States war on terrorism because al-Qaeda was a common enemy. The only connection between al-Qaeda and Iraq was an eight-year-old agreement for Iraq to broadcast the speeches of Salman al-Awdah, a cleric who was critical of the Saudi royal family.[33] These speeches may never have even been broadcasted at all and certainly would not constitute going to war.  The second major reason for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was developing Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). First, Weapons of Mass Destruction have never been found in Iraq proving definitively that Iraq was not developing WMD technology. Even analyzing the intelligence before the strike from the United Nations, the Central Intelligence Agency, the 9/11 Committee and other sources there was never sufficient evidence to justify the Bush administrations assertions. Second, Iraq simply did not have the technology necessary to launch a WMD strike on the United States. The threat to the United States was not very great even if they had WMD’s. Third, a bad precedent was established that the United States would engage in a pre-emptive strike if it felt its interests were being compromised. The United States took down Saddam Hussein relatively quickly; however, this only incited a civil war in Iraq and allowed al-Qaeda to begin terroristic strikes in Iraq. The Iraq conflict also cost the United State’s war efforts in Afghanistan allowing the Taliban and al-Qaeda to regroup in Kandahar.
            The United States image in the Middle East was further compromised by its use of torture on its enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay.  In some cases, they turned them over to other countries like Egypt and Libya that used enhanced interrogation techniques.[34] The United States use of water boarding, sleep deprivation, nudity in front of female guards and other means of humiliating and torturing Arabs held in these detention facilities confirmed al-Qaeda’s assertions of the lack of morality in the West. Enemy combatants were not charged or given a trial and were deprived of their human rights under international law. The people detained as enemy combatants came from a variety of sources. American and NATO forces in the region captured some of the enemy combatants but many were captured by other Arab countries who received a financial reward for their capture. They did not even have to provide charge or evidence to sustain a charge to receive the reward. The likelihood of fraud was high under the system that was established.
Where Does the West Go From Here?
            Huntington argued that in order to alleviate a clash of civilizations, a civilization must change from the inside. To do this all of its political and economic elite must be generally supportive of the move, its public must be willing to acquiesce in the redefinition, and the dominant groups in the recipient civilization must be willing to embrace the conversion. Al-Qaeda and other jihadist groups as well as the tyrants that desire to remain in absolute control over their country are opposing Islam’s conversion into a more Western civilization. As long as these forces maintain a level of control there will always be hostility between Islam and the West.
            There are certain things that the West can do to facilitate the liberalization of the Middle East, including ceasing to support the tyrants who are currently ruling in Muslim countries. The United States must allow the people to decide how they want to be ruled be it through Shar’ia or democracy. Overall, America must treat Muslims fairly and consider them as equal to Americans. Muslim noncombatants must be given the same value as American noncombatants.
            The United States must also rethink the use of sanctions that primarily affects the people and not the governments. The people are left to suffer and die in countries with sanctions on them when it was the government that was responsible for the offense. Thousands were killed and even more suffered from starvation and lack of adequate medical care in the United States sanctions on Iraq. There must be a better way of dealing with corrupt governments than punishing the people.
            Most importantly, the United States must rethink its policy with regards to Palestine and its continual support of the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians. Muslims are united in their continual support for their Palestinian brothers. They see the establishment of Israel as an attack on Muslim lands and this provides the most credence to Bin Laden’s argument for a defensive jihad being declared against the Zionist-Crusaders in the West.
            Ultimately, America must improve its image with Muslims and win them over to support its side by making democracy more appealing. The strict adherence to Shar’ia law that al-Qaeda supports, does not appeal to most Muslims. The only reason Muslims have in part supported al-Qaeda’s efforts is due to the detrimental influence the United States and other Western countries have had on the region. Bin Ladenism is a self-defeating ideology and therefore, the best policy might just be to let it run its course. However, unless America redefines itself in the Middle East a new terrorist group will just take its place that might attract a bigger audience and more participants.
            As of now, al-Qaeda is in self-preservation mode. Bin Laden and other leading al-Qaeda members are literally running for their lives and this is delaying a future attack of the magnitude of September 11 from happening. However, issues emerge as to the sustainability of a prolonged war effort in the region. The United States simply cannot afford to continue to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan to seek out and attack al-Qaeda and Taliban members. These groups are going to have to be incorporated into Afghan and Pakistani culture as total annihilation is unattainable and most likely unnecessary.[35]
            Finally, intelligence and record keeping should go a long way at monitoring terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. Knowing how al-Qaeda operates and by disrupting their terroristic plots will have a damaging effect on al-Qaeda. Efforts should also be taken to try to freeze al-Qaeda’s funding and economic capabilities. People who travel to or from known countries where terrorist training camps are located like those in Pakistan or Yemen should be given careful investigation to determine their ties to the region. Along with redefining its foreign policy, intelligence gathering is going to be the United States’ key weapon against terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda in the long-term.
Concluding Remarks
            The events of September 11, 2001 were the climax of an age-old clash of civilizations between the West and Islam. Each side has grievances against the other, some that can be substantiated and others that cannot. Each has come out of a particular culture and has a very particular worldview by which they interpret history. In al-Qaeda, this was the notion of the archetype and a specific interpretation of the Qur’an. These differing civilizations have come into closer contact with one another through different foreign policy decisions implemented by the West, the most important of which is the support for the state of Israel. The West brought with them new ideas that conflict with longstanding customs and traditions; this has created division in Islam as to how far to accept these new ideas. Those who reject these new ideas and want to return to the foundations of Islam like al-Qaeda’s pursuit to recreate Islam. The United States has been firm in its position, however, in Islam there has been some fragmentation between the radicals and the liberals. Economics has also played a key role in the conflict between the United States and Islam particularly with regard to oil.
            The United States response to the September 11 attack was to invade Afghanistan and later Iraq. Domestically the United States passed the PATROT Act, which improved intelligence between government organizations but at the cost of liberty. Al-Qaeda is on the run and the attack had the exact opposite effect they were hoping for, placing more Americans in Arab states and overthrowing their safe haven in Afghanistan. However, the United States use of torture at Guantanamo Bay and turning enemy combatants over to other countries that practiced enhanced interrogations techniques had a harmful effect of America’s image in the Middle East. The United States must begin to reform its image in the Middle East by allowing the Muslim people their rights to self-determination, recognize that Muslims are equal to Americans, and truly stand for the principles it claims to represent. Intelligence must also be stepped up in the Middle East and other regions subject to terrorist organizations.
            In Christianity, we have a golden rule that calls people to “do to others what you would have them do to you” (Matthew 7:12, NIV). American’s would not like it if Arabs took over some of America’s land, had a sustained military presence in another region, plundered America’s natural resources and overall attempted to push their ideology upon the United States. The September 11 attack humbled America and gave it a taste of its own medicine. However, this does not excuse the September 11 attack either. Evil cannot be returned with evil, especially in an attack on noncombatants. Neither side’s actions in this enduring clash of civilizations are excusable. Al-Qaeda will not compromise its demands, the question facing the United States is how much can it afford to pay to defend its interests in the Middle East and how much can the United States afford to give up in the Middle East.
The people in Egypt and Tunisia were able to take control of their countries by overthrowing the tyrants in their country and several other countries have attempted to do the same. True democracy in these countries will lessen the appeal of al-Qaeda and stand opposed to their theory that these states are puppets of the United States. However, with the rise of democracy is the rise of uncertainty as to who will assume control in the country and how receptive they will be to the United States. Nevertheless, it is these internal movements that could put the biggest long-term dent in al-Qaeda and other radical Islamist groups.  

Bibliography
Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011.
Combs, Cindy. “Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century.” Boston: Pearson Education, INC. 2011
Esposito, John. “Unholy War, Terror in the Name of Islam.” New York: Oxford University Press.2002.
Gerges, Fawaz. “Journey of the Jihadist, Inside Muslim Militancy” Orlando: A Harvest Book Harcourt, INC. 2007.
Goldschmidt, Arthur Jr. “A Concise History of the Middle East.” Colorado. Westview Press. 2010.
Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007.
Huntington, Samuel P. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs. Council on Foreign Relations. 1993
Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005.
Sageman, Marc. “Leaderless Jihad, Terror Networks in the Twenty-first Century”. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2008



[1] Huntington, Samuel P. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs. Council on Foreign Relations. 1993
[2] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 49)
[3] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005. (pg. 139-144)
[4] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 347)
[5] Krygsman, Herbert. “History of the Muslim World.”Sioux Center. Dordt College. Spring 2010.
[6] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 108-122)
[7] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 20)
[8] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 22)
[9] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 27-29)
[10] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 27-42)

[11] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 35-42)
[12] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 36-42)
[13] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005. (pg. 160-171)
[14] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg 19-23)
[15] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 15-19, 37)
[16] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 239-240)
[17] Sageman, Marc. “Leaderless Jihad, Terror Networks in the Twenty-first Century”. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2008 (pg 71-108)
[18] Goldschmidt, Arthur Jr. “A Concise History of the Middle East.” Colorado. Westview Press. 2010. (pg. 418)
[19] Goldschmidt, Arthur Jr. “A Concise History of the Middle East.” Colorado. Westview Press. 2010. (pg. 432-433)
[20] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 49-51)
[21] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 298-302)
[22] Habeck, Mary. “Knowing the Enemy, Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror” Yale University Press. 2007 (pg. 44)
[23] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 29)
[24] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 336)
[25] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 111-113)
[26] Sageman, Marc. “Leaderless Jihad, Terror Networks in the Twenty-first Century”. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 2008 (pg 125-146)
[27] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011 (pg. 46-47)
[28] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011.(45-47)
[29] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 149)
[30] Lawrence, Bruce. “Messages to the World, The Statements of Osama Bin Laden.” New York: Verso. 2005 (pg. 239)
[31] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011.(pg. 77-79)
[32] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 245)
[33] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 152)
[34] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 98-107)
[35] Bergen, Peter. “The Longest War, The Enduring Conflict Between America and Al-Qaeda” New York: Free Press. 2011. (pg. 309-334)