The negativity of this whole argument about Gaza is getting me down. I think we all feel for those people, and beating each other up verbally is maybe the Kosite version of a howl of empathetic pain. I hope so anyway.
So I have a positive suggestion I want to try to unpack in this diary. I need to start by describing the 'problem' as I see it.
I tend to see the big big picture and long trends. I see the problem and the way to address it in social and economic terms rather than political or military. I am picturing a seemingly small engagement that snowballs over time, maybe even what some would describe as a viral interaction.
The Problem:
The Islamic world and what I'll call the Western world are utterly foreign to one another and tend to regard each other as existential threats. In the big picture it looks like an endless escalating struggle between, very generally, two ways of looking at things.
How is it then that Chinese, Peruvians, Amer'kins, Africans (mostly) and so forth all fit into one camp, and the whole Islamic world fits into another? It goes to the way we deal with money. Islamic law strictly forbids the paying or charging of interest on loans. This means that Muslims are significantly prevented from taking part in most of the world's economic activity. It also means that they are likely to regard much economic activity as essentially (really, in its very essence) evil, satanic, a trap of the wicked. (Some of us these days might feel they have a point, somewhat.)
Another big difference between the two worlds is the role of women. Granted, many traditional societies are not Islamic, but still strictly limit the role of women, and some Islamic countries may be more liberal than others. This line is much blurrier than the line about paying interest, but still I think most agree that Islamic cultures seem like real he-man cultures where women at least seem to act far meeker. I'm understating this to avoid arguments.
The Problem is two cultures that cannot integrate with one another, and will regard each other with mistrust, misunderstanding and hostility even if the people involved have good intentions. It's not whether the glass is half full or half empty. It's whether you're looking at a dog dish, a bath tub, or a Baptismal font. We can't get on the 'same page' (cringe) because we are using different books.
The problem is centuries in the making, and engagement will have to start very slowly. We must begin to engage the Islamic world economically, and at the same time elevate the power and status of women at all levels in the Islamic world. When the status and power of women are raised, anywhere in the world, the birth rate drops, and the education level increases, and the poverty level drops as a result. It takes a long time, but in terms of social evolution it's a sudden and shocking change in a traditional society. We are still feeling the aftershocks of a similar change in the 'culture wars' we all love so much.
The positive suggestion I have to help in this engagement is to direct resources toward microcredit and microfinance, with a few changes from the way it's described in the links. First, the franchise of microcredit and finance would be offered mainly to women. Women would have an easier time proving they have not been involved in violent organizations, and that would obviously be another prerequisite. This could create a social and economic niche for widows, for example. Second, it would have to charge no interest. The microcredit franchise would have to be couched as a charity. When business people who borrowed money from the credit co-op charity succeed, perhaps they could voluntarily and publicly make contributions, gifts, to the charity. This giving would show how charitable they are, and also how successful, which I'm predicting will be a winning combination to create social pressure for people to give the gifts. Perhaps some Islamic charity organizations could be convinced to help with this.
Microcredit and microfinance are not going to end intercultural conflict on their own, or very quickly. But we need to look for constructive and practical ways to engage our cultures, or else our engagement will take the form of escalating violence. The above 'business model' may seem unworkable, at least in terms of yielding much profit for investors, except as an investment in peace. Conflict is another form of engagement, a way for different cultures to learn each other's strengths and weaknesses and come to respect each other, and maybe eventually get along. It would be less ugly and expensive if this learning engagement process can happen with as little bloodshed as possible.
There is already a division in the Muslim world between those who want some degree of modernization or Westernization, and those who want to dig in their heals and fight for their traditions. Every time there is a war, this second group gets confirmed in its views, and the members of first group look like chumps of the enemy. (Sort of the way those of us with a multicultural point of view suffer in war time here, but much more so.) By using money and directing it toward women, we can cause the pro Western group to rise in status and power. In the course of a generation, young people see that pro Westerners are dynamic and going places, getting rich by local standards, while the traditionalists look backward, poor, and all shot up. All of this needs to be handled with respect for traditions, and with great patience for how long this kind of change takes. (I guess that's why I can't see a government puling it off. The trouble with governments is everything they do suffers from being designed by committee, almost half of whom want it to fail, and are just waiting for the wind to shift their way.)
This scheme has several positive features from a strictly non-touchy-feely point of view. It attacks and exploits the already-existing cleavages in Islamic society, between traditionalists and modernizers, and also between men and women. Over the long term, it empowers our natural friends in that society while marginalizing our natural enemies. War, ironically, empowers our enemies while marginalizing our friends. It may not have as much macho appeal as bombing an urban area back to the stone age. Maybe to assuage the macho element of our own society, the charities could sponsor smash-up derbies with Hummers, Hemis, and 18 wheelers with prizes paid in cigarettes, lotto tickets, red bull, and Mickeys 40's. Peace would be worth it.