And yet, 13 years later, the equation of anti-American
Islamic terrorism with anti-Israeli Islamic terrorism remains
inexplicably controversial.
Witness the collective gasp from the
liberal elite when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated
bluntly last week that, “Hamas is ISIS. ISIS is Hamas.”
“Not so,”
they protested. “Hamas is a national liberation movement.” And, to some
extent, it is. But like ISIS (and al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and other
radical Islamic groups), Hamas is comprised of fanatics that use
violence, summary executions and terror to achieve their objectives. And
what, exactly, are those objectives? For ISIS — Islamic State in Iraq
and Syria — and Hamas, which are both Sunni groups and both off-shoots
of the Muslim Brotherhood, they are the establishment of an Islamic
theocracy, the imposition of Sharia law, the purge of apostates and the
blood of Westerners (Americans or Israelis, depending on the group in
question).
To say that “Hamas is ISIS, and ISIS is Hamas” is not
to turn a blind eye to the varying geopolitical interests of different
Islamic terrorist groups. Hamas — like the Shiite group Hezbollah —
seeks primarily to annihilate Israel and “expel the Jews from
Palestine,” while ISIS wants to expel Jews, Christians, Shiites, and all
secular Muslims from the entire Middle East.
Hamas’ target may be
smaller and its goals less ambitious. But the two groups share common
ideologies, objectives and tactics. Most importantly, they share a
common enemy — the West and its ideal of liberal, secular democracy.
“Many
countries are beginning to understand that [Islamic terrorism] is one
front,” Netanyahu said Sunday, and that “[ISIS and Hamas] are branches
of the same poisoned tree.”
The Saudis get it. The Jordanians get it. Even Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gets it.
But
our Golfer-in-Chief and his Secretary-of-Wind-Surfing do not. Even the
barbaric beheading of journalist James Foley is not enough to wake this
administration to the interconnected threat of radical Islam.
Indeed,
when asked about Netanyahu’s comparison last week, U.S. State
Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said: “I think by definition they are
two different groups. They have different leadership. And I’m not going
to compare them in that way.”
Well, of course she’s not. Because
to do so would be to undermine the president’s narrative of terrorism as
disparate acts of “deranged or alienated individuals” (his words). And
it would imply that America had a leadership role to play in defeating
this global menace.
Remember how Obama began his presidency with
an apology tour and a speech in Cairo suggesting that America could
contribute best to world peace by breaking down anti-Islamic
stereotypes? The Great One actually thought he could make peace with
Muslim extremists — after all, it was only George Bush, not America,
they hated.
Now, six years into his presidency, his own Defense
Department says ISIS is more dangerous than al-Qaeda ever was, and
members of Congress believe that the terrorist threat to America is
greater now than before 9/11.
Since his first inauguration Obama
has failed to understand the nature of the radical Islamic threat.
Indeed, in May 2013, he even naively declared that “the global war on
terror is over.”
To which ISIS now essentially responds, “How do you like me now?”
Related Reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment