Cross posted at Peace is Active
Here's a question for you:
What four man team has the best chance to win the war on terror? A Navy Seals team or the Rolling Stones?
No offense to the fine men of the Navy Seals, but I'll take the Rolling Stones.
The "war on terror" is a battle for hearts and minds. Even the military leaders are saying that it is a political battle that can't be solved with more violence. That is why we should stop calling it the "war on terror". We can't kill our way to victory. Are you listening Mr. President?
Imagine a conservative religious family. The parents are extremely devout and think that people should just do whatever the religious leaders say they should do. In fact, they support the idea of a religious Caliphate throughout the Middle East ruled by religious leaders.
Now think of their children. Like most children in devout religious families, they respect their parents, but have questions about why they can't listen to music or why the daughter is not allowed to get medical attention.
If we send a Navy Seals team in to imprison or kill the father, the children will dedicate themselves to getting revenge. The children will create underground terrorist cells.
If we send in the Rolling Stones (through radio broadcasts and cds), the children will rebel when the religious leaders and parents try to enforce their ban on music. The children will create underground networks to have dance parties. Instead of smuggling weapons, the children will smuggle cd's and internet connections.
The youth of Iran are a perfect case study of this. The religious leaders are losing their grip as the children of Iran are demanding reforms. Just as it happens in this country, the youth rebellion leads to a conservative backlash, especially in the rural areas. But the tide of progress has never been stopped by a conservative backlash. The youth of Iran will continue to make changes in their country, especially when they become the adults and start making the decisions. We can have confidence that Iran will continue down a path of reform. There will be bumps in the road, but progress is hard to stop.
Unless of course, we send in the Navy Seals. Then the children of Iran will become radicalized.
The Soviet Union provides another example. There were some people who argued during the Cold War that we should attack the Soviet Union and send in the Navy Seals. This would have caused violence, death, and destruction on an unimaginable scale. Instead, we engaged in a Cold War with the Soviet Union where the Rolling Stones, blue jeans, and the example of freedom and prosperity set in this country led to reforms in the now former Soviet Union.
So I say bring back the Cold War and the Rolling Stones strategy (or perhaps the updated Jay Z strategy?). We will have little success changing countries through military force, but a strategy of peace that supports and encourages reform has a far better success rate. I have no doubt that the religious extremists in the Middle East are holding a losing hand. Their cards can only be played when they have a great Satan to rally against.
The problem with a non-violent strategy is that it takes time and gives us less control. The Soviet Union went through their own process of reform, but it took a long time and we didn't get to control their resources.
Perhaps that is why we were misled into a war of choice in Iraq with visions of mushroom clouds. Our leaders want to use the war strategy because they want the changes in the Middle East to happen fast and according to our leader's interests.
President Bush says we must continue the violence and that he will be judged as brilliant when the Middle East becomes an example of open and peaceful democracies. But that argument is another one of President Bush's use of language to mislead the nation. (For example, when we say we are against the war, he tells people we are against the troops - he often uses troops as his human shields.) Most people agree with the goal of a peaceful Middle East. The difference is how we get there. Bush uses the goal of peace as a reason to support his means of war, but there are other ways to get to a peaceful Middle East. I like the Rolling Stones strategy.