World Watch Focus: The Power of a Few Dedicated Men

20060510

     I have been party to several conversations over the past several months on the topic of fundamentalist Islam that took the same basic direction. In those conversations, generally liberally minded people took the position that the threat of fundamentalist Islam, especially where it concerns the goal of establishing a new Islamic caliphate, is overblown or even completely non-existent. Many educated and aware people cannot conceive of the notion that such a threat can exist in these modern times, or they do not consider the establishment of such a caliphate and all that it would stand for as a threat.

     I am left at the end of such conversations wondering how such otherwise intelligent people can be so ignorant of the facts that present themselves when analyzing such a threat as Islamic fundamentalism and the New Caliphate. Indeed, these facts are borne out in the nature of current Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, in the insurgency in Iraq, and in the headlong confrontation brewing with Iran. Each of these instances reflects the power of a few dedicated men who, by their mere dedication to their cause, represent the capacity to advance the cause of Islamic fundamentalism and the establishment of a new Islamic caliphate.

     Unfortunately, too many Americans seem to have come to the conclusion that the terrorism of 9-11 was somehow a fluke. They do so because they ignore the fact that 9-11 was ideologically and practically linked to similar events in Bali, Spain, and London, among other places. In doing so, they fail to see one of the more important aspects of all of those acts of terrorism, and that aspect is the fact that all of those acts were carried out by small, dedicated groups of men supported by small, dedicated organizations. These acts required neither sophistication nor size, merely individuals willing to ensure their success.

     The same theme can be seen in the current insurgency and sectarian violence in Iraq. The practitioners of this violence number at most a few tens of thousands, compared to a population of tens of millions and a domestic and Coalition military presence in the hundreds of thousands. Yet, these few thousand insurgents and partisans have managed to keep the entire nation of Iraq in a steady state of unrest and instability since Saddam Hussein’s regime was toppled. Actors like al-Zarqawi have, in spite of their own seeming incapacity, managed to hold one of the most significant military assemblages ever fielded at bay with simple guerilla tactics and dedication to their cause.

     Again the same theme reveals itself in the nation of Iran. The Islamic revolution that established the current Shi’a theocracy in Iran was not a populist revolution. The numbers of rebels were in the thousands at best, supported by the framework of the fundamentalist clerics that sought to establish a new order in Iran. Even today, it is clear that many Iranians do not agree with or support the existing theocracy, but the rule of the dedicated thousands who control the strings of power overwhelms whatever the will of the greater populace might be. And in wielding that power, Iran now stands defiant against the rest of the world, boldly building its military and pursuing the possession of nuclear weapons.

     These examples, taken from the modern Islamic world, illustrate a detail of a greater point derived from history: underestimate the effectiveness of small, dedicated groups at great risk. In the developing strength of the small groups of fundamentalist Islam, history reveals the development of the kinds of groups that can change the world by their action.

     Those who doubt such history need not look very far for its evidence. Americans should simply consider the small, dedicated group of men who ultimately defeated the British in the Revolutionary War. That phenomenon is not modern either. Time and time again, the same theme is borne out in history: the invasions of the Huns and the Germans against the Roman Empire, the success of the Mongols against the Chinese, the Zulu against the British.

     In fact, Islam itself is an example. From the first Islamic invasions of 632, a few tens of thousands of Muslim Bedouins managed to destroy the Persian Empire and essentially emasculate the Eastern Roman Empire in less than 100 years, a feat that neither empire had managed to accomplish against each other for centuries previous. And such a feat was accomplished simply because of the dedication of the invaders to their cause.

     The point of this history is that anyone who doubts the capacity of small groups of people to change the course of history ignore the lessons that history has already taught. It does not take hundreds of thousands or millions of Islamic fundamentalists to establish a new caliphate. Instead, it takes a few dedicated men who know where to apply the necessary pressure and how. It takes a surprisingly small army of dedicated followers to enforce such pressure. It takes the right timing and the will to wait for the right circumstances.

     In the previously cited points lies the proof of the concept. Those fundamentalist Muslims working toward the New Caliphate are patient and stubborn. They are also crafty and intelligent. They are already testing the waters for the right circumstances with events like last years violent Muslim protests in France and this years protests against the Muhammad cartoons. Whenever these people see the chance, they test the waters, looking for the right moment to advance their plans.

     Indeed, they understand that their greatest assets are the anger and chaos that threatens most of the Islamic world. In violent protests and ongoing political strife, the supporters of the New Caliphate can sow the seeds of their own design. In the frustrations of the Palestinians, the ongoing strife of Lebanon, the insurgency of Iraq, and the growing Muslim discontent in France, Spain, and Italy, they can spread their doctrine of the caliphate as the solution to the Muslim world’s ills. And how many converts to does it take to be enough?

     There are many among the liberally minded people cited at the beginning of this post who will inevitably see the preceding argument as not much more than a scare tactic. They will demand to see the evidence of such a conspiracy, and they will demand to know how such an action as the establishment of a new caliphate can be accomplished in the face of widespread division within Islam. These are all cognizant points, but they are points to which there are already answers.

     The answers to these points come in the form of the known and acknowledged spread of fundamentalist Islam throughout the Muslim world. A chief belief among all of these varieties of fundamentalist Islam is the belief in the reestablishment of the caliphate as a prime means of returning Islam to its former place of world greatness. These sects believe that the teachings of the Koran, Hadith, and Sunnah are literal, and that the demand for Islamic unity under the caliph is chief among those literal teachings.

     These fundamentalist sects are real and growing. These teachings are found in the mosques and madrasas run by sects like the Wahhabis, the Qutbis, the Salafis, and the Iranian Shi’a around the world. These teachings manifest themselves in organizations like al-Qaeda, Ansar al Islam, Hezbollah, and Hamas. How many of these groups, working toward a similar goal, does it take before some sort of critical mass is reached?

     Therein lies the nature of the threat and the reason that the threat must be addressed and quickly. As the power of Islamic fundamentalism grows worldwide through the militancy of nations like Iran, through the spread of fundamentalist ideals to nations like Sudan, Ethiopia, and Somalia, through the threat of Wahhabi insurrection in Saudi Arabia, through the alliance of Sunni Syria with Shi’a Iran, the critical mass comes closer to a reality than it has been since the armies of the Ottoman were at the gates of Vienna in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth centuries.

     The solutions to this threat are complex, and the actions that must be taken are not easy, yet to do otherwise is to find the very nature of the world changed. The establishment of a new Islamic caliphate would represent the return of a time when the method that Islam was spread by was conquest and when ideas disagreeing with the fundamental interpretations of Islam were brutally crushed. Failure to address such a threat is really a failure to understand the nature of the very liberty that the West so apathetically holds to in this modern age.

     Ultimately, just as the critical mass of the spread of Islamic fundamentalism is required to usher in the age of the new Islamic caliphate, so too must a critical mass be reached if the threat of that spread is to be checked. Until enough people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, are convinced that Islamic fundamentalism and the New Caliphate are a threat, there is no hope for countering that threat.

DLH