ISIL And Paris

ISIL and Paris

It is impossible to ignore in this blog what happened in Paris last Friday but also difficult to know what to add to the widespread media coverage, other than a very personal view. So this is it. The many manifestations of only too understandable grief have been matched by expressions of similarly easily understandable anger and immediate threats and, indeed, actual acts of retaliation. And the attacks in Paris have clearly strengthened the hand of the extreme right-wing, anti-immigration Marie Le Penn.

Yet I can't help thinking that all the anger is exactly the reaction that ISIL wants. There is a saying that revenge is a dish best eaten cold and I believe that this is a classic case. If ISIL is to be defeated, not just now but into the forseeable future, then it cannot be done on the battlefield alone. ISIL is undoubtedly evil but not necessarily stupid. It is ISIL's objectives, chaos in Europe and a war between muslims and the rest of the world, that must be defeated. The attacks in Paris must therefore not be allowed to contribute to those. In the current situation, a defeat on the battlefield probably has to be achieved but that will by no means be the end of ISIL, nor can it be.

There will always be a small minority attracted to the idea of a glorious death in some cause or other: dulce et decorum est. But that does not explain the thousands who have flocked to support ISIL, the large majority being disaffected msulim young men. But, to counter this, making a preferential case for young muslim men in Europe does not make make much sense either; anyway, it is hardly realistic in the current climate of opinion. More understanding of the mindset of muslims in Europe would be welcome but that has to be two-way: the muslim community itself must adapt better to European ways and demonstrate not just in words but in deeds that it totally rejects ISILand is at least completely tolerant of European habits and traditions.

That may be asking for the moon right now but steps in that direction can certainly be taken. What must be abundantly clear is that the West should stay out of Arab affairs once the situation in Syria and Iraq is sorted (temporarily). Intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly played a big role in the rise of ISIL. It may offend western sensibilities to see citizens of other countries suffer subjugation and torture but what must also be understood is that a simple humanitarian reaction (easily understandable) may simply increase that suffering even in the short term. Democracy and freedom as we know it have never played much part in the Arab world and we in the West should not seek to impose them. We have to accept that a large part of the world is inhumane by our standards and adopt the greatest care and reflection before intervening in any way. The tyrant Assad will probably end up ruling Syria again, Afghanistan will probably fall once again under Taliban control and who knows what will happen in Iraq. We simply have to leave those countries to find their own destiny. As a corollary, aid programmes will also have to be significantly rethought.

Accepting this will be as hard for those of humanitarian bent who want to help the world as it will be for those whose only concerns are wealth or power. But that, I believe, is how it will have to be.

Footnote

None of my friends in the village have been directly affected by the events in Paris as far as I know. Most have contacted friends and relatives there to ensure they are safe. However, I have also noticed that the handful of muslims in the village have been keeping a very low profile, which is a pity as they are all decent people and their stance, though understandable (again) should not be necessary. Indeed, in a way, it is a small victory for ISIL's objectives.