US "National Security": Obama to Break Link Between Islam and Terrorism?

Darrell Ezell writes for EA:

Preparations are under way by key National Security Council officials, reshaping the US National Security Strategy, to break the Bush-era linkage of Islam to terrorism. While this symbolic move is essential to restoring relations with the Muslim world, it promises to unleash a firestorm among conservatives in Washington.

According to sources, Pradeep Ramamurthy, head of the White House Global Engagement Directorate (a four-person NSC team), and his deputy Jenny Urizar are making progress in their rewrite of US national security documents set for release before the President’s trip to Indonesia in early June. They are focusing on the dynamic of language and how a respectful tone in communication, avoiding loaded religious rhetoric, may aid in restoring US–Muslim relations in the world.


It is no secret that the language in the Bush period linking the religion of Islam to terror contributed to ideological tension between the US and Muslims after 9/11. Statements by President Bush such as “This crusade, this war on terrorism is gonna take awhile…” or academic arguments presented by Bernard Lewis and Samuel P. Huntington that America is facing a “clash of civilizations” contributed to a misinterpretation of the religion of Islam and Islamic society by U.S. officials. This narrow misreading provided the intellectual framework and vocabulary for the 2006 U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS), which asserted, "The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century and finds the great powers all on the same side – opposing the terrorists."

The 2006 NSS accomplished, on the surface, two specific goals: 1) It identified in clear terms America’s “new” enemy (“Islamic radicalism”, terrorists, and rogue states) against whom the US planned to defend itself at all necessary cost militarily; and 2) It set out a course of action for rebuilding key nations in an effort to promote effective democracies within countries identified as failed states.

To assure the Obama administration does not fall into the ideological traps set up by this approach, Ramamurthy’s office will pursue a set of 2008 recommendations outlined by the Counter-Terrorism Communications Center ("Words that Work and Words that Don’t") and the Department of Homeland Security ("Terminology to Define the Terrorists").

Acknowledging the damage caused by the Bush administration’s choice of language, the January 2008 DHS report made the recommendation that the U.S. government consider more strategic terminology.

The terminology that senior government officials use must accurately identify the nature of the challenges that face our generation....At the same time, the terminology should also be strategic – it should avoid helping the terrorists by inflating the religious bases and glamorous appeal of their ideology…If senior government officials carefully select strategic terminology, the government’s public statements will encourage vigilance without unintentionally undermining security objectives.

That is, the terminology we use must be accurate with respect to the very real threat we face. At the same time, our terminology must be properly calibrated to diminish the recruitment efforts of extremists who argue that the West is at war with Islam.

The shift in national security language indicates the Obama Administration is comprehending the dynamic of communication as a tool to improve or further deteriorate future relations with Muslims. Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh declares, “It’s a good message of assurance, and differs from the former American administration’s position on this matter which showed no real understanding of Islamic countries….This decision by Obama will help to reform the image Muslims have of America.”

The conservative backlash has already begun with FOX News featuring the assertion of Senator Joseph Lieberman (as a former Democratic Vice Presidential candidate, a key ally for Obama's opposition) calling the shift in national security language “dishonest, wrong-headed, and disrespectful”. Arguing against the White House’s use of more strategic language, Lieberman insists:

It's a group of Islamist extremists who have taken the Muslim religion and made it into a political ideology, and I think if we're not clear about that, we disrespect the overwhelming majority of Muslims who are not extremists.

Senator Lieberman’s position points to the danger of a continued marriage of the terms Islam and radicalism in US national security documents. Underneath the surface, he, like most conservative writers, seeks to keep the current war on terror framed in religious/ideological terms. That position may make it easier for scholars to follow the narrow-minded resolution of Lewis and Huntington through the call for the religion of Islam to "reform", assuring its compatibility with the West. However, the use of the loaded terms sustained the ideological context of a global debate dominated by the tension between US foreign policy and groups like Al Qa'eda and the Taliban.

By dropping the unhelpful vocabulary, the White House sends the message that it is willing to discern the value of promoting a language of understanding over the theme of "combat". It is essential that the Administration make this linguistic shift, not just to apply political correctness to U.S. foreign policy, but to implement a more engaged framework of communcation before the President's summer address to the Muslim world in Indonesia.

MENA House: An Interview with Head of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood

Christina Baghdady notes a special political appearance on Egyptian television:

On Wednesday, Egyptian broadcast journalist Mona el Shazli conducted a rare and exclusive interview with Dr Mohammed Badi’a, the leader of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.

Several issues were discussed, notably the internal disputes within the MB and its reflections on the media. Amidst reported disputes between the MB’s "members of Parliament and reformists", members of the Brotherhood’s Guidance Bureau have submitted a folder of documents for an official formation a political party to the organization’s parliamentary faction. This, however, has caused significant “distress” to the Shura Council, who consider themselves as the Brotherhood’s highest authority.

In the interview, Badi’a claimed that these reports were unfounded. He said the MB has appointed media consultants for the political party to communicate with the press in an honest manner.


The interview also considered an "official" statement from the MB supporting a Presidential bid by Mohammad El Baradei. Badi'a said that the political group are supporting el Baradei as he had made similar proposals to those put by the MB in recent years (although he did not specify the content of those proposal). Badi’a asserted that the Nobel Peace Prize winner was able to move the "stagnant" water. a reference which commentators may analyse as revitalising the opposition.

Badi’a said that his party do not intend to field a candidate in the election, as their primary aim is to ensure a "fair" leader comes to power. Badi'a adds that the MB's electorate has expanded to "everyone" and that it seeks political leadership adopting Islam for all people to create a "fair" society.

Badi'a called for a free and fair election and said he had no objection to Gamal Mubarak, son of President Hosni Mubarak, running for the presidency as long as he did so in a legitimate manner. The head of the MB, however, made clear his objections to the banning of the MB, as he said there were no legal grounds. Badi'a claimed that the MB are not a threat to the security of society; their forthcoming media campaign would reflect on their civil activities, such as building Islamic schools, providing jobs, and developing the activities of those who wish to join their party.

Mona el Shazli concluded the interview by asking, "Out of the possible scenarios, what direction do the Brotherhood intend to take: to isolate themselves from the political community, to reform themselves internally, or to make a truce with the regime for the current period?" Dr Bada’i rejected these scenarios, saying instead that the MB will push for economic reform and look to play a significant role in change for the good of Egypt.

The Latest from Iran (15 April): Accepting Authority?

1315 GMT: We'll be on extended break today, as I'll be lost in the wilds of Georgia in the US. While I make my way back, EA readers --- as they did yesterday --- will be keeping the news and chatter going.

1300 GMT: The Oil Squeeze (cont.). This time, it's exports rather than imports (see 0920 GMT) causing an issue. Khabar Online reports, "From the early 2010 Iran’s oil export has dropped by 378,000 barrels a day compared to 2009 and it will cause a $9.5 billion deficit in the country’s oil revenues this year."

NEW Iran: A View From Tehran “The New Year Challenges”
NEW Iran: A Note About the Voice of America, NIAC, and the “Journalism” of The Washington Times
Iran’s Nukes: Can Tehran and the US Make A Deal?
The Latest from Iran (14 April): Ahmadinejad’s Struggle

Still, Iranian officials maintain a positive line:

Iran's Oil Minister says US-led sanctions against Iran have failed as the country has managed to become self-sufficient in oil production and products.

"International sanctions are not a new issue and we have no problem in dealing with them," Masoud Mirkazemi told reporters on Wednesday after a cabinet session.

1105 GMT: We've posted a separate analysis, "A Note About the Voice of America, NIAC, and the 'Journalism' of The Washington Times". And we also open a window on analysis inside Iran with a piece from Iran Review, "The New Year Challenges".

1055 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. RAHANA claims that Mottahareh Bahrami, currently detained in Evin’s women’s ward, has been sentenced to death, pending appeal, for alleged links to the Mujahedin-e-Khalq "terrorist" organisation. Bahrami was arrested on Ashura (27 December 27), along with her husband, her son and 2 friends.

1050 GMT: The Subsidy Battle. More back-and-forth over the Ahmadinejad fight with Parliament on subsidy reductions and spending. Mohammad Reza Khabbaz of the Majlis' Economics Committee has reiterated that the Government must implement the Parliament-approved subsidy plan; however, Ahmadinejad backer Ali Asghar Zarei has insisted that implementation is up to the President.

On another front, Fereydoun Hemmati of the Supreme Audit Committee has insisted that the budget report for last year cannot be altered. The report has a number of provocative claims, including the "loss" of oil revenues by the state.

1035 GMT: The Corruption Allegations. As the charges of corruption by prominent MP Elyas Naderan against First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi resonate, the "hard-line" newspaper Kayhan has called for an end to fighting amongst "fundamentalists".

1025 GMT: Rumour of Day. Khabar Online suggests that former President Mohammad Khatami will be attending a global disarmament conference in Japan next week. The Japan event comes after this week's nuclear summit, led by President Obama, in Washington and Iran's own gathering this weekend.

0930 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Peyke Iran claims news of an "unknown" prisoner, student and Mousavi campaigner Yasser Yousefzadeh, who has been held incommunicado for more than a month.

Baha’i photographer and musician Artin Ghazanfari, released last week on $50,000 bail, has been re-arrested.

Human rights activists, via A Street Journalist, offers a full summary of developments, including the report that almost 30 detainees across Iran are now on hunger strike.

0920 GMT: The Oil Squeeze. Another intriguing report this morning, and one arguably with far more significance than the Iran Parliament's reported retreat....

A company spokesman has said that Malaysia's Petronas is halting oil shipments to Iran. Petronas, one of the largest suppliers to Tehran, has not made any deliveries since mid-March.

0910 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Meanwhile, back to immediate everyday concerns....

Kalemeh claims that the renewed detention of Abdollah Momeni, the leading student activist, was caused by his refusal to cooperate with security and intelligence agents while on temporary release. Other activist and Momeni’s wife, assert that Momeni was pressed to denounce Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and his organisation, Advar-e Takhim Vadat. Momeni was also asked to participate in a series of staged student gatherings.

Momeni's return to prison followed a meeting last week of Mousavi and Advar-e Takhim Vahdat.

0900 GMT: We return from an extended break to find the headline-grabbing story, as framed in The New York Times, "Iran’s Parliament Limits Its Power as a Watchdog".

Nazila Fathi's story, drawn from state media but with no details, claims, "Parliament’s decision...limited lawmakers’ ability to review regulations adopted by the Guardian Council, the Assembly of Experts, the Supreme National Security Council and the Expediency Council." Fathi evaluates, "The decision seemed to be an acknowledgment of the reality that the elected Parliament was often blocked from fulfilling its role as a watchdog over the institutions of state."

It is, to the say the least, a most curious report. Parliament has been embroiled in a heated dispute with President Ahmadinejad over his economic proposals, and the corruption allegations against First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi offer a possible showdown.

We'll look for developments, but for now, is this a Parliamentary retreat or a bit of mischief by some state media "reporters"?

Iran: A View From Tehran "The New Year Challenges"

Analysis from inside Iran can often be as interesting for what lies behind the words on the page as for the claims on the surface. Consider, for example, the latest perspective in Iran Review from Firouzeh Mirrazavi:

About one month after the beginning of the new Iranian calendar year (March 21, 2010) and following international registration of Norouz by the United Nations General Assembly, Iran is facing new challenges: part of this is domestic while another part emanates from Iran’s international and regional policies as well as international pressures it is bearing. Some Iran experts maintain that social unrests following presidential polls in 2009 have led to the isolation of certain parts of the Iranian society, political circles, media crew, and political parties and activists. Post-election events have deepened the gaps and put the country on a wrong track which cannot help to solve any of the existing problems.

The Latest from Iran (15 April): Accepting Authority?

As history has proven in past several thousands of years, enemies usually hit the country in such junctures by fanning the flames of differences. Ambiguities in international relations, especially where Iran’s national security is at stake, have further complicated the situation. Examples to the point include:


1. Iran’s nuclear case and plans by the Security Council and 5+1 to impose tougher sanctions on Iran as the country is getting ready to host an international conference on disarmament and nonproliferation and a similar conference on nuclear security is forthcoming in the United States;

2. Elections in Iraq and persistence of political challenges over the composition of the next Iraqi government;

3. The ongoing situation in Afghanistan and prospects of possible reconciliation between [President Hamid] Karzai and NATO alliance and Taliban forces;

4. Iran’s relations with Saudi Arabia which have been marred by an ongoing crisis of distrust between the two states in addition to territorial and strategic pressures from other Persian Gulf states which are in line with the regional interests of western countries;

5. Israel’s continued threats to use military force against Iran;

6. Tension between Iran and its northern neighbors over the country’s share of the Caspian Sea’s energy resources; and

7. Insecurity of the Iranian borders due to widespread presence of foreign troops in neighboring countries and activities of terrorist and insurgent groups in border areas.

Having a healthy, happy and progressive society by taking advantage of knowledge, expertise and efficiency of all social classes and political groups is the best way to overcome the above-mentioned difficulties. Problems can be successfully solved only when the majority of the Iranian nation, regardless of their political tendencies, lends its support to the government. National unity is an inevitable necessity under existing circumstances and to secure Iran’s rights and interests, there is no better option than strengthening national unity and fostering peace and tranquility in the country.

Kyrgyzstan Uprising: Strange Days in Jalal-Abad (Pannier)

Although the drama in Kyrgyzstan has receded, we are keeping an eye on developments, as the provisional government tries to establish its authority and deal with the ousted President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. Meanwhile, Bruce Pannier reports for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty:

These are strange days in Jalal-Abad. A branch of the Silk Road passed through this southern Kyrgyz city and the area has hosted travelers for thousands of years, and there is a lot of local pride.

But Jalal-Abad and its surrounding region have received much unwelcome attention since a native son -- President Kurmanbek Bakiev -- returned and made the city his base in an attempt to cling to power.

Kyrgyzstan: An Eyewitness Account of the Uprising (Judah)
Kyrgyzstan Analysis: What Brought On the Colourless Revolution? (Madlena)

The first thing anyone familiar with Jalal-Abad notices is that there are fewer people than usual on the streets. Normally, it is difficult to weave through the crowds that fill the sidewalks in the city center, and even more so to navigate through the bustle of the bazaars downtown.


But everyone here knows what happened in the northern city of Talas and the capital, Bishkek, last week, when scores of people were killed in the unrest that eventually forced President Bakiev to seek refuge in his home region. And no one wants to be outside if that sort of violence breaks out here.

On the surface it appears that life goes on in Jalal-Abad. For the last few days, more and more places of business have opened their doors to customers and slowly more people are venturing out of their homes to buy the basic necessities.

But the presence of Bakiev, who still claims to be the legitimate president, hangs over the city and is a very sensitive subject for conversation. That is because it is unclear who is on whose side.

This uncertainty was evident at a rally Bakiev held in the city center today. There were more than 4,000 people hanging around the scene, but Bakiev only drew applause from about one-third of that crowd when he made his appearance. And almost everyone was looking around to see who was cheering and who remained silent, as if to gauge which side they should be on.

No One Taking Sides - In Public

Not surprisingly, few in Jalal-Abad want to make any comment about that topic. Kyrgyzstan has an active political culture, but when asked on the street if they were pro-Bakiev or “pro-opposition,” everyone suddenly turns politically apathetic.

One young woman on one of the city’s main streets said she didn't follow politics. A young man standing next to her said the political feud didn't concern him, his family, or his friends.

Down the road in one of the bazaars, the responses were similar. A man selling jeans and shoes said he hoped the whole problem would just go away and he would be left in peace. Similar comments were made by shopkeepers, waiters, firemen, and construction workers. Hardly anyone wanted their opinions to be recorded, even though their comments were innocuous.

The acting provincial and city officials are all recent appointees of the interim self-declared government in Bishkek, so it is clear which side those officials support, at least publicly.

More curious is the position of the local police, who are returning to duty every day in growing numbers. Police cordoned off a route to allow Bakiev to get to today’s meeting in the city center. Traffic police also helped regulate the flow of vehicles to and from the April 12 rally near Bakiev’s home in the nearby village of Teyit.

The acting mayor of Jalal-Abad, Mederbek Usenov, told RFE/RL on April 12: “Kyrgyzstan is a democratic country. They have a right to hold a meeting.”

The police would not speak about whom they supported. At an intersection just off the city center where the rally was held today, police pushed away a microphone, shaking their heads to show they had no response on whether they were for Bakiev or the new government.

One senior policeman did comment briefly but again avoided speaking about the current stand-off for power. “I am simply working as usual, doing my job,” he said.

Pressed on the point about whether allowing Bakiev and his convoy to reach the city center wasn’t itself a sign of support for the ousted president, the policeman shot back: “Get out of here!”

It's fair to say most everyone in Jalal-Abad does in fact support one side or the other. But these are strange days here, and everyone seems to prefer that the people around not know if they are pro-Bakiev or pro-interim government. It is not Bakiev or the new government they are afraid of, but their fellow Jalal-Abad residents.