The Kuwait test

When Kuwait was attacked, America mobilised its forces, constructed a broad coalition of allies and led the battle to drive out the Iraqis. When the United States was attacked, Kuwait voiced sympathy for the victims and urged America not to make any military response. This contrast between a robust response to aggression and lacklustre support for an ally in need has not been drawn by angry American congressmen; it was voiced by a leading Kuwaiti politician in pointed condemnation of the shuffling attempts to evade responsibility that have paralysed so many governments in the Middle East.

Sheikh Saud al-Sabah, a former Ambassador to Washington, said his country had been hijacked by groups that called themselves Islamic. He argued that, instead of claiming America had brought the attacks on itself by pro-Israeli policies, Kuwaitis should, if they had any honour, have sent rescue teams to New York and donated money to the victims’ families. His plain speaking is refreshing, overdue and almost without echo in a region where no leader has dared to confront the hypocrisy of Islamist denunciations of American “aggression” against Afghanistan.

Kuwait is a country that commands attention in Washington. Sheikh Saud’s remarks will lend weight to those calling for an American re-engagement in the Middle East as a part of the fight against terrorism. Another such voice is that of King Abdullah of Jordan. His country’s long border with Israel gives it a strategic importance far greater than its modest population would suggest. For the past 40 years this importance has been amplified by the late King Hussein’s steadfast and often lone support for the West and commitment to political moderation. King Abdullah is well placed, therefore, to argue the case for a Western initiative that would undercut the extremists, bolster the exposed position of those propounding faith in the peace process and quell some of the suspicions of America and its intentions.

The King made these points yesterday to Tony Blair, knowing that they fall on receptive ears and are certain to form part of the Prime Minister’s current intensive policy co-ordination with President Bush. Jordan insists that it has done as much as any country to confront terrorism at home and rein in those Islamists attempting to fan anti-Western sentiment. The ubiquitous intelligence service has banned unauthorised public assemblies, arrested opponents of the peace process and put on trial dozens of suspects linked to the al-Qaeda network. Yesterday it was revealed that Jordanian Intelligence foiled plots by bin Laden supporters against British, American, Jordanian and other Arab embassies in Lebanon over the weekend. If true, this kind of co-operation is of far greater value than bland phrases and blander gestures.

King Abdullah insisted in Downing Street that the war against terrorism must not be seen in the West as a war against Islam. That point has been repeatedly underlined in London and Washington. What the King, the Emir of Kuwait and all those desperate to limit the appeal of bin Laden to disaffected Arabs must now ensure is that this same message reaches the wider Muslim world. It is not enough simply to express lukewarm diplomatic support for the war on terrorism; those leaders who know the cost of indulging extremism must be uncompromising in refuting the claims that the attacks in Afghanistan are an assault on all Islam. They are nothing of the sort, and moderate Arab leaders know that. They are the first necessary step in eliminating both the terror networks and the stranglehold that they have over Muslim opinion. Until that is done, no claim, including those of the Palestinians, can be properly addressed.

i don't think it's possible to overstate the bravery of sheik saud in his article. he is one of the few in the arab world who understands friendship and loyalty. (disclaimer: he was also, very briefly, my boss under contract eight years ago, and i have enormous respect for him -- for reasons just such as his article.) by publishing the piece, he as much as painted a target on himself not just in substantial parts of the arab world but in substantial parts of his own country. such is the price of recognizing u.s. friendship over there.

dep

I agree. I said as much about a group of five clerics who issued a fatwa saying it was OK for Muslims to join the war against Bin Ladin. Although some Freepers greeted this news with sarcasm, in fact it was a very brave thing for them to have done. They were setting themselves up as terrorist targets, and they live right in the middle of them.

A lot of Muslims have complained that Americans are now prejudiced against them. Too bad. Unless they stand up to their fellow religionists publicly like this, they will deserve our mistrust and contempt.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.