A phenomenon unlike any other has flourished extensively over the past decades, coagulating ever so rapidly in many parts of the world: general distaste towards the west. And as educated and thoughtful individuals, it is our absolute duty to investigate the cause of such a situation for treatment and prevention of its further cancer-like metastasis. Before any of that can be properly addressed, the root cause of the problem must be thoroughly investigated (although the full reasons need more than a few compendiums to be completely analyzed). To understand this horrid phenomenon, it is imperative to look at its state of being in the Islamic World, particularly the
Middle East. Over many years, there has been an expanding, self-created ocean of hate towards the west, particularly the United States and Britain by many Muslims. Although many
Neo-cons and their proxies would like the world to believe that this attitude came into being solely unprovoked, completely gratuitous in nature as they say, the reality is unfortunately the opposite. This feeling, shared by millions of individuals, was created by the political policies of the west, unjust, antagonizing and utterly contemptible. Now, this is neither a rationalization nor a defense for the atrocities committed by some extremists, whom it is a misnomer to call Muslims. On the other hand, this is an attempt to understand this serious problem, a political pathological view to a disease with a potentially terrible prognosis.
Britain, the imperialistic supremacist empire at the beginning of the 20th century, created the first ingredient for this rancid mixture of hateful emotions.
At first, it was the sending of
Thomas Edward Lawrence, later popularized as Lawrence of Arabia, to internally destabilize the Ottoman Empire, inciting revolts in the Islamic world. While masquerading under a veneer of lies during
WWI, Britain then occupied and oppressed the inhabitants of modern day Jordan, Palestine, Iraq as well as many non-Muslim countries, like India and China. Making agreements such as Sykes-Pico(Where the French were involved as well) after the fall of the Ottoman empire, the British then went on to make the atrociously unwarranted Balfour Declaration in
1917. This promise guaranteed members of the Jewish faith a homeland on the territory of others. It promised, out of some non-existent authority, a land where already Palestinians live to someone else. So disgustingly obsessed were the British with their power that they even considered offering the Jews Uganda or Argentina as an alternative homeland. This unwavering, self-given right over the land of others is what first led to a feeling of injustice and
absolute betrayal by the Arab and Muslim people.
The second and most impacting reason for this hate is the evident, completely vociferous
support of the west to the illegal and certainly criminal occupation of Palestinian lands. The unremitting backing of the west, namely the United States and Britain, to Israel in all its endeavors, no matter how unwarranted, led to the view held by most Muslims that the international community is against them. Of course, this can be analyzed historically. While Churchill was ringing his anaphoric speeches all over the world, his country backed the illegal declaration in 1948, almost twenty years after the Balfour Declaration, of Israel as a state. In fact, even Churchill himself, the
epitomic example of the chauvinistic view towards Muslims, after being asked regarding the issue of Palestine, said “I don’t believe the dog has the right to the manger, no matter how long it’s lain there.” That was the mentality then and many might argue that countries, after almost seventy years, have recovered from the atrocities committed by the British and that enmity should no longer be prevalent.
Alas, that might be true had the British ceased to exercise their self-given, self professed, almost godly providence over the lands of others. In other words, the hold of the British, ostensibly removed after the abolition of the British Mandate, still persisted. They continued to supply arms, weaponry and financially and politically endorsed the augmenting amount of illegal settlements of Palestinian lands. Not only that, but the British, despite the presence of the UN council, also failed to react to the atrocities committed by the various Zionist gangs, including the
Irgun,
Hagana and many of
Manachem Bagens genocidal organizations, operating under Theodore
Herzl’s plan of separation and transfer of Palestinians, tantamount to the Nazi holocaust. The entire world has been properly educated about the repugnant acts of the holocaust, but none know about
Deir Yaseen,
Qana, Gineen, Sabra and
Shatila. These were, just like the holocaust, acts of mass murder, only this time it was not Jews being killed, but Palestinians, slaughtered in cold-blood and forced to flee by the Israeli war machine.
The victim became the aggressor and all of these acts were neglected and blatantly condoned. Not only that, but the west continued to support its new ally in the
Middle East. A prime example is when Israel, the UK and France attacked nearby Egypt in the Tripartite Aggression in
1959. This unconcealed and deliberate invasion, this breach of international law was yet another injustice against the Islamic world. One might mind, that after such acts of violence, no more would’ve followed. Yet still, the perverse desire for bloodshed, and the evident hostility of Israel and the west continued and
in 1967, when Sinai was occupied. This Six-day war, as it came to be known, fashioned as some sort of self-defense, resulted in the occupation of the neighboring countries’ territories (Sinai, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights) to fulfill the Jewish dream of a state from the Nile to Euphrates. This invasion was backed by the US, which supplied continuous intelligence to the Israeli Generals, including the warmonger Ariel Sharon. Eventually, some territories were regained, in exchange for some Arab subservience promised by the marionette rulers of the time (such as Hafiz Al Asad and Sadat).
Indeed, the stage was now being set for yet another act of belligerence towards an already internally and externally oppressed Muslim world.
In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon, once again hiding behind the repeated excuse of retaliation rather than clear aggression. Thousands were killed, Beirut reduced to ruble and concentration camp-like residences established for the many refugees and the victimized families. The reaction of the U.S. and Britain, if there was any, was extremely tepid, and the perpetual breach of Israeli-backed infringements of so-called international law continued.
The early and mid 20th century support of the west towards Israel continued and continues to this day. One prime example of the dog-like devotion of U.S. presidents towards Israel can be proven by the means by which they get elected. Living in the “democracy” they live in, any U.S. president desiring to reside in the White House must be the spaniel of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Bush Jr. and Sr. were tied to the leash, even Barrack Obama, vice president Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton and many more submit and continue to submit to the Israeli Lobby.
It is no wonder then, to hear
President Bush referring to Israel as America’s closest ally and to witness his frequent visits to the lobby. And certainly, it is no surprise either that in every UN vote, the United States, represented by crazed conservatives like John Bolton, votes pro-Israel and vetoes any fair or just resolution towards Muslims. Indeed, apartheid has been and is being established in Israel, and the U.S., Britain and many others condone it. Whether it’s the building of the West Bank Wall to separate Palestinians from society, or the starving of innocent civilians in Gaza by the orders of current Prime Minister
Ehud Olmert and his posies, the west remains silent. The uninhibitedly mild responses mean nothing and did nothing as this pandemonium of violence continues. Another example is the summer 2006 invasion,
a 33 day war and a second invasion of Lebanon. In their usually cyclical manner, western governments declared the war to be an act of self-defense, asserting that the killing of hundreds of civilians and the kidnapping of hundreds was a totally justifiable reaction to the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, who were illegally in Lebanese land at the time of their kidnapping. Qana, which was the place where the now almost-dead Ariel Sharon massacred hundreds, was once again a subject to Israeli genocide when a building, full of children and innocent families, was bombed.
And all we have are futile condemnations and suppression of international outcries. All of this injustice, committed over the decades we are so often encouraged to forget, is only one reason to the “swamp of hatred” as George Galloway put it, was created.
The United States further replenished the feeling of contempt by Muslims when it
invaded Iraq in the 1990 Gulf War. Justifying it as some sort of American act of liberating generosity, the war on Iraq was in reality a callous attempt to control the financial resources of one of the richest states in the Muslim Arab world. In fact, Donald
Rumsfeld, whom many consider as much as war criminal as the recently captured
Karadzic, visited Saddam Hussein and supplied him with weapons and maps to invade Kuwait.
With this encouragement,
Sadam invaded Kuwait and then the U.S. had succeeded in creating a rationalization for the invasion of Iraq. The Middle East. Having killed thousands of innocent Iraqis and plunged the country into an abyss of economic and humanitarian depression, the U.S. secured its economic gains and left only to be revisited by the moronic ignoramus
George Bush Jr. a few years later. Using the emotionally charged world after the horrible, non-tolerable acts of 9/11, which no Muslim would ever support nor excuse, Bush and his doll Blair, despite international opposition to the war, invaded Iraq illegally once again.
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died as a result, sectarian conflicts flourished, billions of dollars were looted and crimes like
Abu Ghraib, where prisoners were tortured and humiliated for the perverse entertainment of soldiers and
Falujah, where thousands of innocent civilians were killed, were committed. All of this was due to the fabrication of facts by
Colin Powel and many more as well as the United States' refusal to listen to its own intelligence agencies that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and that it had as much ties with
Al Qaeda as Mother Teresa did. But that was not enough to satisfy George Bushes abhorrent lust for blood. After invading Afghanistan, Mr. Bush then went on to create torture prisons like Guantanamo Bay where prisoners were taken, water boarded and starved to give information they did not even have about Bin Laden.
And who is
Bin Laden? Is he not the man who was sent by the United States itself to combat the Soviet Union in the 1980s? Is he not the man who was supplied by the U.S. with weapons and money to do their dirty work in the region? Is he not the criminal the U.S. had created? All of this, and yet the question persists, why does the world, not only Muslims, hate the west?
So great is the negative and obscene
influence of the west in the Muslim world that they have succeeded in recruiting every collaborator, every disloyal, unscrupulous individual to be their marionette ruler of the subdivided Muslim World. Recently,
Omar Al Bashir, the president of Sudan was accused of crimes against humanity in the Darfour Region. Before,
Sadam was accused of the same thing. Yet, it is impossible to find the same accusations lain rightfully against the late King Hussein of Jordan, his son King
Abdullah, the kings of Saudi Arabia,
Hafiz Al Asad of Syria or
Mub Hussniarak, the “president” of Egypt. Is King Hussein, who bombed his own capital city in 1970 and installed his own son as King after his death and acted was a servant for the Israeli
Mossad not a criminal? Is King
Abdullah, who gambles with the public’s money and lives in a palace while his citizens starve from inflation and high oil price not a repugnant criminal? Is Hussni Mubarak, who has been president for over 20 years, somnolently squandering the country’s money not a criminal? Are the corrupt kings of the kleptomonarchy Saudi Arabia, uneducated and illiterate, enforcing laws of subjugation and oppression while presiding over the largest oil supply not criminals? In the eyes of western governments they are not because they economically sustain their country, yet in the eyes of every commonsensical, educated and humanitarian individual, they are.
When Muslims see King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia dancing with Bush while the American Armies kill Muslim civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and supply Israelis with Apaches and F-16s, what will they think? What should they think? Shackled and chained in a figurative prison, the Muslim world knows that all the corrupt leaders are politically supported by United States in return for economic gain. And this, this is what contributes to hatred.
