On the Importance of Awe
In the opening hours of the war, you couldn’t listen to the TV commentators for more than 30 seconds without hearing the words shock and awe–the Pentagon code name for the barrage of missiles and bombs that would shake the Iraqi regime to its knees, assuming it didn’t surrender first.
We couldn’t help but detect in this phrase an echo of the prophetic analyses in these pages by our contributing editor Reuel Marc Gerecht. For several years before the 9/11 attacks and since, Gerecht warned that terrorists in the Middle East had lost their awe of American power, and that the key to stamping out terrorism would be to restore that awe. Here are a few passages:
“There are few things in life more debilitating than to make a threat, then fail to follow through. Particularly in the Middle East, where awe is the sine qua non of politics, being seen as ‘wobbly’ is fatal.” (“Good Mullah, Bad Mullah,” Jan. 19, 1998)
“Totalitarians have a sixth sense for democratic weakness. A carnivore, Saddam Hussein probably knew early on (a good guess would be June 1993, when President Clinton cruise-missiled the empty intelligence headquarters) that Washington had no will to fight. By August 1996, when the United States failed to use its airpower to defend the Iraqi National Congress’s lightly armed forces against Baghdad’s mechanized brigades, there was no doubt. America’s hayba–its ability to inspire awe, the critical factor in the Middle East’s ruthless power politics–had vanished. And once hayba is lost, only a demonstration of indomitable force restores it. . . .
“The United States must not try to win a popularity contest in the Arab world–the very act of doing so will make us appear weak. We will not grow stronger merely by reinvigorating sanctions; nor will Saddam grow weaker. If we are to protect ourselves and our friends in the Middle East, who are many, we have to rebuild the awe which we have lost through nearly a decade of retreat.” (“Liberate Iraq: Is the Bush administration serious about toppling Saddam Hussein?” May 14, 2001)
“To defeat bin Laden and his kind, we have to restore our awe, and the only way you acquire and retain such majesty in the Islamic Middle East is through the use of military power. Of course, this doesn’t mean that we cruise-missile an empty pharmaceutical factory in Sudan and rock-hut training camps in Afghanistan. It doesn’t mean that we fire cruise missiles for a couple of weeks at the Taliban (though that would be a good beginning). It means that we get up close and personal, as Winston Churchill did at Omdurman. . . .
“America must be prepared to inflict immense damage on any other terrorist organization or terrorist-supporting state, even if that means we have to scorch southern Lebanon or Revolutionary Guard dormitories and depot facilities in Tehran. We may have to commit the necessary resources and manpower to topple Saddam Hussein.” (“Bin Laden, Beware: Here’s how to break the spirit of the holy warriors,” Sept. 24, 2001)
Bunfire of the Vanities
What’s Easter without hot cross buns? Some students in England are about to find out, as four city councils have voted to remove the delightful pastries from school menus for fear of offending non-Christians. According to the Times of London, the move took place following some objections to pancakes served in school on Fat Tuesday. Explained a spokesman from Tower Hamlets (more than a third of whose residents are Bangladeshi): “We can’t risk a similar outcry over Easter like we had on Pancake Day. We will probably be serving naan breads instead.”
But are Muslims really threatening to rise up against what the Times jokingly calls “bigot buns” and “hate cakes”? Not quite. The Muslim Council of Britain called the action “very bizarre” and said the bun ban was “taking things a bit too far. . . . Unfortunately actions like this can only create a backlash and it is not very thoughtful. . . . British Muslims have been quite happily eating and digesting hot cross buns for many years and I don’t think they are suddenly going to be offended.”
This is only the latest in a series of politically correct maneuvers by the English branch of the Church of Multiculturalism. Earlier this month, a teacher in West Yorkshire banned the reading of “The Three Little Pigs” for fear of upsetting Hindu and Muslim children. The Muslim Council of Britain similarly called for an end to this ban, which it described as “well-intentioned but misguided.” Not to mention pig-headed.
Whistling Dixie
Country fans expressed shock and disappointment last week after the Dixie Chicks told a British audience: “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.” The petulant comment was a sharp departure for the wholesome trio, which quickly apologized on its website for the anti-Bush pandering. Lead singer Natalie Maines remained defiant, though, saying she thought the president was “ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world.” When this failed to placate the mob (which featured, among other highlights, a tractor in Bossier City, Louisiana, crushing a pile of the band’s CDs), Maines, too, apologized, directly to the president, saying her remarks were “disrespectful.”
In an interesting wrinkle, Salon’s Stephanie Zacharek defended the band’s original remarks, though at the same time arguing that the band deserved some pro-American credit for paying homage to the military in their song “Travelin’ Soldier.” But this ballad of a girl who falls in love with a young man on his way to fight in Vietnam hardly does justice to the band’s musically stated opinions on war. More to the point might be these lyrics from the song “More Love”: Just look out around us / People fightin’ their wars / They think they’ll be happy / When they’ve settled their scores / Let’s lay down our weapons / That hold us apart / Be still for just a minute / Try to open our hearts.
Ah yes, as the troops march on Iraq, all they need is love. And automatic rifles. And chemical suits. And gas masks. And, oh, never mind. One imagines things would be easier for the Dixie Chicks if they kept their views hidden in their music.
I Scream You Scream
A couple of weeks ago, contributing editor Irwin M. Stelzer recommended a few non-French wines for the highbrow anti-Chirac crowd. Then came the much-discussed “freedom fries” for the man in the street. But what to do for dessert? You might try a bowl of I Hate the French Vanilla ice cream. The Star Spangled Ice Cream company is taking orders for this and several other politically incorrect flavors (we’re partial to Iraqi Road) at www.StarSpangledIceCream.com.
Tune In, Turn On, Don’t Drop Out
The Daily Standard will be covering the war in Iraq 24/7. Tune in morning, noon, and night to weeklystandard.com to read exclusive reports from the Middle East, Europe, and Washington. If you’re a subscriber, don’t forget to register on the website to take advantage of the free PDF copies of the magazine. You can then read any of our back issues, and download the new ones without waiting for the mail.
Help Wanted
The Weekly Standard has an entry-level opening for a receptionist. Duties include answering phones, greeting visitors, sorting mail, handling back-issue requests, and various other administrative tasks. Please mail your résumé to: Human Resources, The Weekly Standard, 1150 17th Street, NW, Suite 505, Washington, DC 20036. Or fax (202) 293-4901.
