A Letter to an American true pacifist

Dear Nick:

Thank you for your letter. I know that you are well meaning and wish the world would be a beautiful, peaceful place.  I also wish for the same, but unfortunately this is not the case; it seems to be an illusion. Therefore, as you will see, I am looking at the world in a more realistic manner.

You wrote to me: ”You know that my goal is to turn you into a pacifist.” -- It depends whom you define as “pacifist”. If you mean someone who believes that political conflicts should be resolved without violence as far as only possible, I am a pacifist already today. On the other hand, if you define “pacifist” a person who will not use force under any circumstances, even to defend himself, his family or his community against a life threatening menace, then you have no chance to convert me into that type of pacifist.

My grandmother, uncles and aunts and many of my cousins did not resist the onslaught of the Nazi killing machine -- they were genuine pacifists of the second kind, and they all perished in the Holocaust. Please tell me which type of pacifism do you advocate?  In this context, not only the State of Israel and the Jewish people are fighting for their existence, but also the Western civilization as a whole is now under attack.  In the long run, pacifism of the second kind might bring Israel and the West to their demise, in spite of their current military and economic superiority. Unfortunately, there are quite a few American pacifists of the second kind. These people feel guilty about any violence enacted by Americans.

For instance, they might wish to apologize to the four Arab hijackers of Flight 93 for those crazy passengers who downed their plane in Pennsylvania. These pacifists probably claim that nobody can tell for sure that this plane was going to crush into the Capitol or the White House, killing hundreds of people; maybe it was going to land peacefully in National Airport, and a peace message from Osama Bin Laden to the President of the US… According to these pacifists, the unwarranted interference of those passengers with the noble mission of the Muslim hijackers might have missed a unique opportunity for world peace, ending the incipient global conflict peacefully…What a pity that those four peace-loving Arabs met such a horrible death because some passengers on that flight were not true pacifists. Devout American pacifists refer to certain Islamic propagandists who affirm that Islam is intrinsically a religion of universal peace -- true Muslims are harmless, genuine pacifists. This might be true as long as nobody violates the tenets Islamistic Islam, so gloriously manifested by the Taliban.  

The same pacifists did object loudly the US liberating Afghanistan from the rule of the Taliban, disrupting the operations of the Al-Queda organization. After all, the murder of 3000+ people in New York and Washington, constitute just 1 in 100,000 Americans, which is just a tiny fraction of the American population, less than the victims of traffic accidents over a ten-day period. Moreover, most of those murdered were either involved with American economic globalization or with the US murderous defense establishment. Furthermore, most of them were infidels, so they were absolutely legitimate targets for the oppressed Muslims of the Third World… “Undoubtedly. America is guilty of the 9/11 atrocity,” say our true pacifists. By its oppressive global policy it made those young true believers died for a justifiable cause. On the other hand, the American attack on Afghanistan resulted in the death of hundreds of innocent civilians. What right do Americans have to interfere with the religious practices of a remote country, and why should we care if some believers of non-Islamic religions, e.g., Buddhists or Christians, are persecuted out there for their beliefs? This is not our business. What right do we have to use violence in order to impose Western values on a peace loving, though a somewhat zealous, God-fearing Muslim society.  After all, the murder of infidels has been part of the Islamic faith since its inception, 1300 years ago. Aren’t we advocating freedom of religion? We seem to follow here the British colonial policy that disallowed the burning of live widows in India during the funeral of their late husbands. This is colonialism at its worse! Besides, genuine liberal pacifists know for sure that the true reason for the war in Afghanistan was to allow installation of an oil pipeline from Russia to the Persian Gulf.

Very similar pacifistic arguments seem to be used currently in the Iraq affair. Genuine pacifists argue that the US has no justification to remove Saddam Hussein from power. True, he is a despot who murdered his own sons in law, but why should we, Americans, interfere with family affairs of foreign leaders – if Saddam decided to kill the fathers of his own grandchildren that is his own business.

True, he executed tens of his top military officers, but who are we to tell Saddam how to manage his veteran administration – this way he saved million of Dinars in the Iraqi military pension fund.

True, he murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Kurds and Shiites, but if Saddam wished to restructure the tax revenue base of Iraq, lowering the contribution of ethnic and religious minorities, which is an entirely internal economic decision, why should this bother the US?  Definitely, this is no reason for American military action.

True, he murdered those minority people by lethal chemical warfare agents -- so what? He found this technique more economical!  Moreover, these people buried their dead relatives so Saddam did not even have to construct incinerators a la Auschwitz. The economical benefits are quite evident. The US has no right to criticize Saddam’s economic practices – he has rarely criticized economic practices of the US.

True, Saddam invaded Iran and then Kuwait, resulting in a total of a million fatalities on both sides. But these were regional conflicts that should not be of concern to us, just as we did justifiably not interfere in those cruel, bloody African tribal wars. The fact is that Saddam has never invaded the US.  However, in the Gulf War we invaded Iraq and flagrantly violated a sacred international law. Today we might have been indicted as war criminal in the newly created international tribunal.

True, Saddam violated his signed agreements with the US when Iraq surrendered and he tried to assassinate a former President of the US.  True pacifists will argue that such a violation was completely justified because Saddam was simply following the dictates of his religion – treaties with non-Muslims are not binding if Muslims suspect that their adversary may be intending to cheat.  Furthermore, killing of infidels, especially prominent ones, is one of the commands of the Koran according to the militant Islamistic Islam – Why should we condemn these? Don’t we advocate freedom of religious practice and tolerance of beliefs and customs of other cultures?

True, Saddam Hussein is likely to murder hundreds of thousands of Israelis by biological agents or by nuclear bombs, once he has them, so what? That would be a purely regional conflict, which should be of no concern to us, Americans.  Besides, this will serve those Jews right for trying to settle in an Arab region of the world that, according to our Muslim friends, must be utterly free of infidels! Moreover, eradicating Israel by Iraq will stop those ghastly reports in our media showing repeated terrorist attacks on Jews– when there will be no Jews there will be no more attacks on Jews. Only then will there be true and lasting peace in the Middle East.

We better mind the problems of our own inner cities. Saddam Hussein’s chemical warfare agents are less dangerous to the health of individual Americans than the pollution spewed daily by gas guzzling SUVs.  In brief, let Saddam follow his Islamistic religious convictions and let no innocent Iraqis be hurt by us, the Americans (interestingly, to be a militant Islamist one does not have to be a devout Muslim).  Besides, an attack on Iraq would only serve the oil companies. True – it would lower oil prices – but this would increase their profits in the long run and just add more air pollution.

Let then the Butcher of Baghdad become the Caliph of Baghdad and rule the Arab nation in peace and justice. Then there will be global peace! In retrospect, if we kept out of the European conflict between Germany and its neighbors in 1939, thousands of innocent German civilians would not have been killed by our carpet bombings of German cities.

So say true American pacifists!

I hope, Nick, that I did not upset you by my sarcasm. Knowing that you are a pacifist assures me that you will not shoot me or even hit me with your baseball bat.

Sincerely,

Michael Anbar Ph.D.