War on Terror or World War III? (2) -By Victor Anazonwu

Continued from Thursday

In choosing the path of terror, Jihadists fall into the same error made by the United States-led coalition in moving into Iraq – an exclusive reliance on force to resolve a matter which force cannot resolve. It must be clear by now that it is militarily impossible for ISIL, Al Qaeda or whatever else they are called, to win against civilised humanity. So, the world is fighting a war in which all sides are destined to lose!

To stop violent extremism and avoid another major setback for human civilisation, the world must come to terms with the inevitability of dialogue and the futility of war. The starting point perhaps should be an immediate, universal and unconditional UN-brokered ceasefire. All sides must agree that the solution to this problem cannot be found in the battlefields. The UN must step in to fulfil its mandate. The UN Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki Moon, must step forward to play his role as the world’s moral compass and Number 1 statesman or resign at once. The world urgently needs a giant statesman not a spineless civil servant.

The proposed ceasefire will be followed by a rapid mobilisation and deployment of UN forces (drawn from neutral nations) to create buffer zones in the hot spots of Iraq and Syria. Thereafter, all warring sides must commence a phased and supervised demilitarisation leading up to the pullout of all (Jihadist and foreign) forces from the region. Ultimately, the people of every nation must be allowed to determine how they are governed and by whom. This will eliminate the “occupation factor” from the Middle Eastern equation which has often been used as justification for Jihad.

This thought process is well-understood by the Obama administration which has been pursuing a troop withdrawal strategy from inception. But there is a major challenge here: The new governments in Iraq and Afghanistan are too fragile to stand on their own. And so, if the US cuts the leash and runs, those nations would descend into anarchy. It would have lost whatever tactical and strategic dividends might accrue to its huge investments in blood and dollars around the region. Worse still, it would have paved the way for an ISIL takeover of the entire region!

A solid UN intervention will save Washington and the coalition partners many sleepless nights over this conundrum. Given how hopelessly the world body has failed in enforcing its resolutions and mandate on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, the question arises as to how it may be trusted to undertake this equally tricky and complex mission. The answer is simple: The world has run out of sensible options. Besides, the leading parties in the current crisis have over the last few years nearly exhausted the force option and may be at their most receptive to yield to superior statesmanship and adroit diplomacy. This may also be the best time to throw the lingering Israeli-Palestinian question into the mix and attempt to give all the beleaguered peoples of the Middle East some lasting peace for a change. But who will bell the cat? The world sorely needs a giant statesman.

In the meantime, all people of goodwill must join hands to begin to degrade the ideological foundations and methodologies around which modern day violent extremism is built, like suicide bombing.

It must be made clear that murder or wilful termination of the lives of other human beings, especially innocents who have directly done us no harm, and who bear no arms against us, is a sin in every true religion. There is no condition under which harmless persons can be rightfully attacked and killed. So, the practice of kidnapping and slaughtering innocent civilians or suicide bombing aimed at soft targets is spiritually, ethically and scripturally bankrupt. It is also morally reprehensible. It is unIslamic. If Islam as much as lays down strict conditions under which animals may be slaughtered for food, then one can only imagine the distaste of Allah and His holy prophet at the wanton waste of innocent human lives by those who call His name.

Persons who perpetrate such acts in the hope of “going to heaven” are making a mortal error. Contrary to their expectation, they are actually buying a one way ticket to the hottest corner of hell. Their acts which must be classified as wickedness and unrighteousness carry a punishment not just for perpetrators but for their descendants for several generations. God is able to fight his own fight and does not need puny humans to achieve His purpose.

It must also be said that the deliberate killing of non-combatants is a cowardly act, not an act of valour or bravery or martyrdom. It is depravity at its worst and ranks at the lowest end of human values. It is like two men fighting, and one seeing that he is being overpowered, goes after the wife and children of his adversary and makes to slay them!! It is an admission of weakness; such a person is no match for his opponent. Even war has its rules. If ISIL, Al Qaeda and other extremist groups are truly men, if they are truly armies as they claim (not just angry, disgruntled groups), they would focus on doing battle with and vanquishing rival combatants in the theatres of war – without resorting to underhand methods.

Lastly, blind rage and wanton violence are the worst possible adverts for any religion. They are incapable of winning converts to any faith. On the contrary, they give such a religion a bad name and drive potential converts further away. Although the vast majority of Muslims the world over are peaceful, hardworking members of humanity, the activities of extremists have sadly turned the long beard and the veil into symbols of fear and suspicion in public places. Chances are that young and up-coming Muslims, haunted by such stereotypes, would take little pride in their faith. Or they may find themselves constantly explaining the misdemeanours of the jihadists. Such persons become prime candidates for athesism or conversion to other faiths. That is the extent of damage being done daily to the religion of peace by misguided, blood-thirsty extremists.

Concluded

Anazonwu, a communication strategist and public affairs commentator, wrote in from Lagos via vanazon@yahoo.com