Sunday, November 18, 2007

Islam and the Nation-State

The End of National Sovereignty?

Throughout the world, one of the most prevalent causes of war, terrorism, and political instability is the ongoing weakening of the nation-state system. There are several reasons that the nation-state as a political unit of sovereignty is under threat. One of the most basic causes of this continuous erosion of national power throughout the world is the transformation of minority-dominated enclaves within nation-states into ungovernable areas where state power is either not applied or applied in a haphazard and generally unconstructive manner. ( illegal immigration - Tiger )

While domestic strife between majority and minority populations has been an enduring feature of democratic and indeed all societies throughout history, the current turbulence constitutes a unique challenge to the nation-state system. This is because much of the internal strife between minority and majority populations within states today is financed and often directed from outside the country. ( Saudi Arabia - Tiger )

Traditionally, minorities used various local means to engage the majority population in a bid to influence the political direction or cultural norms of the nation state. The classic examples of this traditional minority-majority engagement are the black civil rights movement in the US in the 1960s and the labor movements in the West throughout the 20th century. By and large, these movements were domestic protests informed by national sensibilities even when they enjoyed the support of foreign governments.

Today while similar movements continue to flourish, they are now being superseded by a new type of minority challenge to national majorities.

This challenge is not primarily the result of domestic injustice but the consequence of foreign agitation. The roots of these minority challenges are found outside the borders of the targeted states. And their goals are not limited to a call for the reform of national institutions and politics. Rather they set their sights on weakening national institutions and eroding national sovereignty.

Muslim minorities throughout the world are being financed and ideologically trained in Saudi and UAE funded mosques and Islamic centers. These minorities act in strikingly similar manners in the countries where they are situated throughout the world. On the one hand, their local political leaders demand extraordinary communal rights, rights accorded neither to the national majority nor to other minority populations. On the other hand, Muslim neighborhoods, particularly in Europe, but also in Israel, the Philippines and Australia, are rendered increasingly ungovernable as arms of the state like the police and tax authorities come under attack when they attempt to assert state power in these Muslim communities.

Logic would have it that targeted states would respond to the threat to their authority through a dual strategy. On the one hand, they would firmly assert their authority by enforcing their laws against both individual lawbreakers and against subversive, foreign financed institutions that incite the overthrow of their governments and their replacement with Islamic governments. On the other hand, they would seek out and empower local Muslims who accept the authority and legitimacy of their states and their rule of law.

Unfortunately, with the notable exception of the Howard government in Australia, in country after country, governments respond to this challenge by attempting to appease Muslim irredentists and their state sponsors. The British responded to the July 7, 2005 bombings by giving representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood an official role in crafting and carrying out counter-terror policies.

In 2003, then French president Jacques Chirac sent then interior minister Nicholas Sarkozy to Egypt to seek the permission of Sheikh Mohammed Tantawi of the Islamist al-Azhar mosque for the French parliament's plan to outlaw hijabs in French schools.

In the US, in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the FBI asked the terror-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations to conduct sensitivity training for FBI agents.

In Holland last year, the Dutch government effectively expelled anti-Islamist politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the interest of currying favor with Holland's restive Muslim minority.

... In the interest of defending the nation-state system, on which American sovereignty and foreign policy is based, the US should reassess the logic of its support for the establishment of Muslim-only states. It should similarly revisit its refusal to openly support the right of non-Islamic states like Israel, Serbia and even France, to assert their rights to defend their sovereignty, national security and national character from outside-sponsored domestic Islamic subversion.

2 comments:

Lady Hawk said...

Dear Mr. Tiger:
I was reflecting on my childhood in the summers in the 60's; how safe I felt, leaving windows open at night and celebrating the 4th of July with my neighborhood. Such optimism, such faith, such peace in our ethnically diverse neighborhood.
We all expected great futures, we all attended neighborhood schools that were public or Catholic-but we all played outside together. We believed America would be great forever. But the web of evil was being woven from McCarthy's defeat and liberal humanists in the 60's.
I used to think Mr. Whit was a pessimist when one time he said "not in this world," but I am starting to see his view. There are too many battle fronts starting with our "leaders" who are traitors.
They spend money as if there is no end to it, and will not enforce laws-will even break laws- continually weakening our country.
People who hurt us are given more rights than law-abiding taxpayers.
I cannot not think of any candidate I want to support for president. There is no one who will get America back to her Constitution.
The evil un is being given the world to run into the ground.
My students have short attention spans and even shorter memories, with no sense-or care-as to what is going on the world.
I had better not discuss anything controversial in the classroom if I want to stay employed and earn a retirement. Even though gay students have a day of silence, other students wear che guevara shirts, and the blood mobile cannot use student donations because of std's, leave controversy to the gudance department.
I see my students losing to drugs,sex and programming through music and other pop culture media.
Hotels are asked to get Bibles out of them and china is banning Bibles at the Olympics. Christian crosses honoring patrolmen are attacked as illegal, and the poor scouts with their virtues are constantly under attack.
Too many battles, too few victories.

Tiger said...

Lady Hawk! You have explained and described perfectly what I've observed over the last 50 years.

Change is part of life and much of the change we've seen was and is for the good.

However, as you point out, a great deal of it is change for the bad - doubly bad because the changes affect our fundamental framework of societal structure adversely and the future of our nation’s integrity (in the sense of being able to hold together).

Caroline Glick does a terrific job in this article pointing out how policy can damage a country's sovereignty - policy misdirected by political correctness and the WORSHIP of wealth.

What's most disturbing to me is the realization that many of the "people" don't even see it!