The Left and the Jihad by Fred Halliday

[applegrove]

The Left and the Jihad
Fred Halliday
8 - 9 - 2006
http://www.opendemocracy.net/globalization/left_jihad_3886.jsp

The left was once the principal enemy of radical Islamism. So how did old enemies become new friends? Fred Halliday reports.


"The approaching fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the United States highlights an issue much in evidence in the world today, but one that receives too little historically-informed and critical analysis: the relationship between militant Islamic groups and the left.

It is evident that the attacks, and others before and since on US and allied forces around the world, have won the Islamist groups responsible considerable sympathy far beyond the Muslim world, including among those vehemently opposed from a variety of ideological perspectives to the principal manifestations of its power. It is striking, however, that - beyond such often visceral reactions – there are signs of a far more developed and politically articulated accommodation in many parts of the world between Islamism as a political force and many groups of the left.

The latter show every indication of appearing to see some combination of al-Qaida, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hizbollah, Hamas, and (not least) Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as exemplifying a new form of international anti-imperialism that matches – even completes – their own historic project. This putative combined movement may be in the eyes of such leftist groups and intellectual trends hampered by “false consciousness”, but this does not compromise the impulse to “objectively” support or at least indulge them.

The trend is unmistakable. Thus the Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez flies to Tehran to embrace the Iranian president. London’s mayor Ken Livingstone, and the vocal Respect party member of the British parliament George Galloway, welcome the visit to the city of the Egyptian cleric (and Muslim Brotherhood figurehead) Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Many in the sectarian leftist factions (and beyond) who marched against the impending Iraq war showed no qualms about their alignment with radical Muslim organisations, one that has since spiralled from a tactical cooperation to something far more elaborated. It is fascinating to see in the publications of leftist groups and commentators, for example, how history is being rewritten and the language of political argument adjusted to (as it were) accommodate this new accommodation.

..... SNIP"

http://www.opendemocracy.net/globalization/left_jihad_3886.jsp

[Adelante]

1. Interesting article, applegrove

I'm not familiar with that site. I'll have to look around there.

[applegrove]

2. I got the article off Arts & Letters Daily. They post the best articles of

the week the world over. I've never heard of that site either. Seems to cover alot of territory. I love finding something new. But I do think by looking into Cheney's eyes some on the left have been danced into backing Saddam Hussein (or saying he wasn't evil). That bothers me. Because I also think it is part of the neocon agenda...to radicalize the left while radicalizing the Islamists..to that they are both marginalized and the enemy of my enemy is my friend thingy. Enemy of my enemy is how Cheney and Rummy got into trouble with Saddam, chemical weapons and genocide in the first place. And big dog says he thinks that is one of the reasons why the US is in Iraq - to clean the skirts of Rummy & gang from the mid 1980s and leave another legacy (oh boy - didn't go so well).

I remember too how awkward it was to be for the war in Afghanistan..for many on the left..even though women were being regularly murdered there for going against sharia laws.

Just one of those things. I never knew the history of the "left" in the middle east.

[applegrove]

4. Are the left & radical Islam doing the enemy of my enemy is my friend -

dance? I don't think so. Palestine is an open wound. Fix that puppy with negotiations or shut up. The left will be attracted to a world injustice. Israel knew that 20 years ago which is why they were sorry to see peace break out all over South Africa. Then it was indonesia & Palestine that were the focus of the left.

The left does empathize. So by feeling sorry for Iraqis in a purposely slow war.. are they backing the jihad? Nope. Not usually. They just hate the slow war (Liberals too). But I've gotten into trouble arguing that one should not feel sorry for the wife of a insurgent spending the night in jail because her husband was busy blowing people and things up and you cannot just hand your feelings over to everyone.

It just seems like this is a cry for a black and white world. I know the neocons want that. But isn't they way the world works or has worked. Not when it is filled with adults. Perhaps the authors of this article are sorry that people on the other side of the world..particularly civilians..inspire sympathy when they are war fodder.

But that would be the nuanced view.

[Adelante]

6. Black and white world

There's the rub. It never is just black and white, is it?

Stop that nuance thing! :D

This one should bring trouble, but it's also interesting.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy/venezuela_3255.jsp

[applegrove]

10. Bush himself - re: his actions - radicalized Chavez even more. Seems

it is the neocons themselves who put the left in the dangerous boat of jihadists. Theirs is the b&w view of the world.

Read too much Chavez lately. He needs to steer clear of crazy Mc PM of Iran before I take an interest in him again. Oh - and he needs to stop aping Bush.

[yurbud]

3. this seems dubious

The left was criticism the Taliban when the corporatists were trying to do business with them.

People like me don't think Islamism is good, but rather if we let people take care of their own business, they will eventually get sick of that religious crap as is happening in Iran.

Conversely, if you attack countries to control and monopolize their resources, it stands to reason that people will rally around whoever is most vocally and effectively fighting for their people, however grave those fighters flaws are, sort of like Russians uniting behind Stalin to fight Hitler. Neither was good, but people prefer to be screwed by the domestic asshole.

Why do so many analysts act as if Arabs and Muslims are a whole different species? The only way for that analysis to even seem to make sense is if you turn a blind eye to any legitimate grievances they may have that drive them into the arms of the extremists.

[applegrove]

5. I agree. There are some people who will carry a Hizbollah flag. Who

are they? - not everyone on the left. Probably a tiny minority. Like maybe .0000546% of leftists carried Hizbollah flags. Do we know the story of the person carrying the flag? Maybe the left is changing because the world is changing and you can no longer assume that a march at Trafalgar's square consisted of pasty-faced, granola crunching white people. So you could have a person who was born in the ME and grew up to become a leftist. And has a take on what it was like to live in Lebannon that is quite..Lebannese?

But food for thought. Even if it makes me feel like I'm being forced into a box someone else has prepared for me!

[yurbud]

7. and if a white guy is carrying the flag, he could be a plant

[applegrove]

13. ?

[yurbud]

14. provocateur, planted trouble maker

[teryang]

8. "The trend is unmistakable?"

What trend? This is a strawman.

[applegrove]

12. The author thinks the left will make the enemy of mine enemy is my friend

mistake Cheney and Rummy made re: supporting Saddam Hussein.

The world is much more nuanced. The marches..shades of the rainbow.

[bemildred]

9. This is drivel. The left is not a friend of the jihadis.

Just because you think Bush, for example, or Olmert, for another, is an asshole, that doesn't means you like Osama; far from it.

[applegrove]

11. Agreed.

[yurbud]

15. this sounds like the scholarly analysis of Bill Kristol--or Bill O'Reilly

[applegrove]

16. It does quite a bit!

[yurbud]

17. they were just careful not to say traitors, moonbats, or any of the right

tip offs.

[applegrove]

18. It has been a neocon meme for while now..that the left is anti-semetic.

[struggle4progress]

19. Fred had some demented ideas in 2003 on war in Iraq:

Oil, imperialism and "hypocrisy"
Among the hundreds of thousands protesting in London, most saw Bush and Blair as a bigger threat than dictator Saddam Hussein.
February 16, 2003
By David Aker

.... Fred Halliday of the London School of Economics believes that Blair now has no choice but to join the U.S., even if it defies the will of the U.N. and proceeds to war without a further resolution .. "We are far more likely to see real progress on Palestine if there is a war in Iraq," he says. "The Americans will push on it and compromised Arab leaders will probably try to revive the Saudi proposals that came through the Arab League last year and have since been on ice." Halliday points out that the aftermath of the last Gulf War produced the Madrid Conference, which eventually led to Oslo. "There was this positive linkage," he says ..

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/02/16/london/index.html?pn=1

Yet another exciting reason to go to war in Iraq ... uh, yeah, ri-i-ight, Fred. And now, he's pushing this wingnut idea that leftists like jihadists. Let him go cheney hisself.

[bhikkhu]

20. Look at history - it is natural

the left considers people, that if people are treated justly they will "behave", and "bad behavior" is evidence of injustice. Race and religion are unimportant.

The right considers the authority of the state (or economic status quo, in another perspective), and that people must behave regardless. Race and religion are simply selling points for whatever is necessary to maintain economic and governmental status quo.