
Memo to the next president
In his memo-to-the-next-president column in Friday's New York Times, David Brooks offers candidates Barack Obama and John McCain some advice about how to deal with Iran. Because it's unrealistic to expect that the White House has the power to neutralize the Iranian threat, Brooks writes, all the next president really can do is contain and wait for the radical regime in Tehran to fall:
Your job is to restrain Iran's momentum until the fundamental correlation of forces can shift. For amid all the doleful news, there is a hopeful tide. Opinion is turning slowly against extremism. The über-analyst Dennis Ross says that he has noted it among the Palestinians. Michael Young writes that opinion is shifting against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Peter Bergen, Paul Cruickshank and Lawrence Wright have in their different ways written about the intellectual crisis afflicting Al Qaeda. It may not happen over the next four years, but as Ross has noted, where Islamists rule, they wear out their welcome.Your job may be to wage rear-guard political battles until the ideological tide can turn. It's not glamorous work, but governing isn't campaigning. You volunteered for this.
Unfortunately, this optimism is misplaced. I'm not sure where Brooks or these analysts see Islamism wearing out its welcome. In Lebanon, Hezbollah's power and political support is growing. Whereas three years ago Gaza was ruled by the Israelis and two years ago by the Palestinian Authority, today it is ruled by an Islamic terrorist group, Hamas, that repeatedly has stymied Israeli and moderate Palestinian efforts to contain it (see: Hamas' breach of Gaza-Egypt border, Israel's inability to neutralize Gaza rocket threat, etc.). In Afghanistan, the Taliban is making a comeback. In Pakistan, the Islamists are gaining ground. And in the Middle East, every day sees Iran's sphere of influence grow. Though Iran's current president may be stumbling at home due to the country's faltering economy, the unelected, fundamentalist Shiite clerics that really control things in Iran still have a stranglehold on the country.
Brooks' analysis is more wishful thinking than "The Reality Situation," as he calls his column. The Iranian regime may well fall on its own, but hoping that it will happen before Iran becomes a nuclear power is a callous gamble. Attacking Iran may not be the answer, but crossing one's fingers and waiting for Islamism to recede, rather than actively confronting radical Islamists who seek to spread their brand of fundamentalism through the force of violence, is just plain foolhardy.
2 Comments
Islam,
Politics
Comments RSS Feed Reader Comments
For a man of his intellect, Mr. Brooks appears to be very naive. He seems prepared to totally ignore the Hamas charter and to ignore the “Missing Imam” theology of Ahmadinejad. In the time it would take for any real change to occur in the thinking of the Iranian leadership, Islam could and probably would, have mounted even greater offensive acts against the infidel West.
Our European friends have their own Islamist problems resulting from their open immigration policies. Now, dealing with a large, radicalized Muslim minority presents challenges that are more immediate to those countries than is the Iranian promise to obliterate Israel.
Thinkers and writers of today, have neglected to connect the dots leading from WWII Naziism to radical Islamism. The trail is obvious to any who will look. Ignoring this reality can only lead to serious problems for the West.
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, you must first be logged in to JTA. If you are not registered, please click here.
Already a JTA member?
Need to know? Get JTA's free e-newsletters!
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Claude S. on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Yaakov Cohn on Connecting the dots: Susan G. Komen, J Street and Bill Clinton
- Herbert Kaine on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
- Lloyd Trufelman on Netanyahu doth protest too much?
- ASC on Times travel writer on Israel: ‘A politically iffy burden’
Share



Paul Palnik
05/30/08 04:11 PM
Mr. Brooks and his quoting circle of foolish optimists imagine that their intellectual negotiating acrobatics actually mean something to the fundamentalist Islamic world.
Mr. Brooks can not accept the fact that we are in a struggle between Islam and the west. He can’t accept it because he imagines we are not in such a struggle because he refuses to accept such terminology.
Sadly....he misunderstands those deeply dedicated to serving Allah. Perhaps they can be talked out of it....he dreams. Maybe we can then talk the Jews out of The Torah and the Christians out of Jesus too.
Then Brooks will get his bliss; a clean secular state. Ha Ha..his ideas are actually quite funny.