www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Of Tyrants, Peace, and Oil

Friends,

This may seem a strange topic for this forum. It may even be inappropriate. Then again it may be a very appropriate topic.

Is there anyone unconcerned about the confluence of tyrants, oil, and peace? Does it have theological ramifications? I think the answers to these rhetorical questions are obvious (or is that statement itself redundant).

For whatever it's worth here are some ideas I've had rumbling about in my head on this Good Friday.

First, each country is responsible for its own government. I wonder how far any form of democracy will go in Iraq when the people of Iraq did not fight their own war of independence. But then, few of us know what the people did or did not do to end tyranny in their own country. Perhaps they are more ready for some form of freer society than we know.

Second, tyrants put little effort into developing their own people for fear the people will use the power of learning to develop democratic principles. Tyrants are able to exist and repress their people if they have support from the outside. The West has given that support to the tyrants of the Middle East because of our incredible dependence upon Middle Eastern Oil. Moreover, the boundaries of most of these "nations" were drawn not by the people themselves but by European Colonial powers. One wonders how different the history if that area of the world would have been if the European powers had not forced such boundaries for their own purposes.

Third, I still find it hard to believe that this war was necessary...but the milk is spilt. The theologians task, and aren't all Christian to be theologians even if they aren't "great" theologians, is not to conjecture what might have been but to reflect upon what is? We have fought and won a war. What happens now?

Here are some big "ifs" and possible scenarios that have come to mind these last few days.

1. If we have now shown that tyranny in two lands, Afghanistan and Iraq, will be fought and conqueored is it possible that we will help these lands discover more democratic principles that can be applied to their own situations.

2. If we can do that successfully will we have opened the door to the destruction of cultures? I hope not, but the record of democracy followed by unrestrained capitalism makes the prospect of a culture neutral change pretty elusive.

BUT, if that can be pulled off will that send a message to all of the countries of that region that tyrants can no longer survive and that at least a more tolerant form of Islam will arise. I know, I know, its not very promising that there are tolerant forms of Islam, but stay with me here.

3. None of these "ifs" will succeed unless the West weans itself from its dependence upon oil, or at least from Middle Eastern oil. Sadly, I see very little sign of that happening and its the only area in which the West has some control.

It does seem to me that some of the following must happen in our own country for #3 to happen.

a. We must get back to the idea of conservation. I know what kind of car I'd like to get for my next car but I don't think I will. Big cars don't get good gas mileage. (We own two small cars now.) We must also look at ways of weaning ourselves off of plastics.

b. We must push our nation to explore other forms of energy more fervently and we must be willing to use those other forms ourselves. I remember how much creativity was stirred in the mid to late seventies after the OPEC oil challenge. I haven't heard much recently. We need to get back to that.

c. We must encouraging our government to get on board with oil conservation practices and to encourage the Europeans to stop propping up Middle Eastern tyrants by buying their oil.

d. In the shorter run we must explore for oil within our own country more.

Finally, I've tried to find some good sources for just how much oil we import from the Middle East. I've found one place but I can't find up to date figures for US imports of oil from the Middle East. I've heard that the percentages are down from a decade ago to around 30% from 50% but I can't find confirmation. Does anyone have a good source?

Like I wrote, I don't know if this is an appropriate topic for this forum but aside from very techical sites which often cost money to join I haven't found another forum for this discussion.

Dan Lauffer

"1. If we have now shown that tyranny in two lands, Afghanistan and Iraq, will be fought and conqueored is it possible that we will help these lands discover more democratic principles that can be applied to their own situations."

I'm skeptical of this. The development of a stable democracy really requires a highly-developed economy and a large, educated, politically engaged middle class. It really doesn't work particularly well in places where the demographic is not dominated by the middle class (witness the "democracies" of Latin America). The economic development and stability must come first before one can reasonably expect democracy of any stable type to take hold. If we try to install democracy without that economic development taking place first, we will simply be handing over these countries to the Islamic extremists, because that's who will get "elected" by the relatively poor--relatively uneducated--ticked off--and therefore highly vulnerable to religious manipulation--masses.

"2. If we can do that successfully will we have opened the door to the destruction of cultures? I hope not, but the record of democracy followed by unrestrained capitalism makes the prospect of a culture neutral change pretty elusive."

It really depends. It was pulled off in Germany and Japan after WWII thanks to the development of the economies in these countries, without Germany and Japan becoming little Americas culturally. Yes, there has been cultural borrowing, but not an obliteration of the local culture. But this doesn't transplant well everywhere. Germany worked, more or less, because Germany was and is a Western country to begin with. Japan worked, more or less, because Japan has a fairly unique history of cultural "borrowing" and adaptation such that this kind of borrowing and adaptation is not seen as completely threatening by Japanese culture. Japanese culture is very eclectic by Western standards. The Islamic world is an entirely different kettle of fish, and one which certainly sees Western cultural inroads as being inconsistent with the local Islamic culture, which is not prone to eclectic, tolerant ways like the local culture of Japan is, in some respects. In the Islamic world you have a culture that is pretty ingrained and which, in significant respects, is inconsistent with many of the principles that underlie Western culture. What is needed is a reform of the Islamic world from within -- a reformation of Islam from within. Fat chance of that happening any time soon, however.

"3. None of these "ifs" will succeed unless the West weans itself from its dependence upon oil, or at least from Middle Eastern oil. Sadly, I see very little sign of that happening and its the only area in which the West has some control."

I don't see the connection here. The oil money is clearly needed in the region as the economic base. Without economic development, there won't be any development of democracy. There has to be the development of a middle class, and this surely won't happen if the regional oil revenues dry up. Problem under the current system is that the oil money is controlled by relatively few people in these countries ... something that can't last forever.

"a. We must get back to the idea of conservation. I know what kind of car I'd like to get for my next car but I don't think I will. Big cars don't get good gas mileage. (We own two small cars now.) We must also look at ways of weaning ourselves off of plastics."

Agree here.

"b. We must push our nation to explore other forms of energy more fervently and we must be willing to use those other forms ourselves. I remember how much creativity was stirred in the mid to late seventies after the OPEC oil challenge. I haven't heard much recently. We need to get back to that."

Hard to do when petroleum is so cheap here. In Europe it's 3x the price it is here, and so people are more conservation-minded. Here it really is ridiculously cheap.

There are prototypes of hydrogen automobiles available. It will be interesting to see if this catches on.

"c. We must encouraging our government to get on board with oil conservation practices and to encourage the Europeans to stop propping up Middle Eastern tyrants by buying their oil."

Well, the Europeans also *sell* a lot of stuff in the Middle East, and so they have "client" regimes there as well. It should be no secret that France, Germany and Russia all had lucrative contracts with the ancien regime in Baghdad, and certainly this played no small role in their reluctance to get rid of that regime.

"Finally, I've tried to find some good sources for just how much oil we import from the Middle East. I've found one place but I can't find up to date figures for US imports of oil from the Middle East. I've heard that the percentages are down from a decade ago to around 30% from 50% but I can't find confirmation. Does anyone have a good source?"

Unfortunately I don't have a good source, but I remember reading that the bulk of our oil comes from Venezuela and Mexico, with a smaller amount (30-40% sounds right) from the Middle East. Europe is a much larger consumer of Middle Eastern oil than we are.

Brendan

The case of Iraq has a lot of contradictions, in fact Iraq had the best standards of life in the Middle East before the Gulf War, it was a very prosperous nation, with a tyrant in the government.

I don't believe that democracy is a guarantee of success to nations. Undevelopped nations that were "democratic" had little success in amelliorateing the life conditions of the population (this would be the case of Latin American countries, if you compare the progress in education, hospitals, health, etc of Mexico and Cuba with the rest of the countries that had "democratic" governments.)

Tyrants are often supported by western countries because the provide stability, your comments on the Middle East dictatorships are quite true. The Baath in Iraq, Syria and other countries provided a lot of stability and controled most of the ethnic problems in those countries.

Moreover, the boundaries of most of these "nations" were drawn not by the people themselves but by European Colonial powers.

This is related to the existence of true and false nations. An example of a false nation would be Yugoslavia and almost all the African countries (in Africa the situation you describe is more obvious than in the Middle East.) False nations are often ruled by dictators because they're the only ones who are able to opress true nationalism, and the West support them as long as they are able to do this (Milosevic lost the support when he decided to defend the Serbs.)

The case of the Middle East was quite defined both by European empires, and also by the former Ottoman authorities. In Iraq he Ottomans granted buricratic power to the Sunni minority in the south to keep shias under control, and the small Chaldean minority in the north to keep Kurds under control. This "status quo" was not lost with the Baath, which preserved the oppression of Shias and Kurds.

Brenden,

"I'm skeptical of this. The development of a stable democracy really requires a highly-developed economy and a large, educated, politically engaged middle class. It really doesn't work particularly well in places where the demographic is not dominated by the middle class (witness the "democracies" of Latin America). The economic development and stability must come first before one can reasonably expect democracy of any stable type to take hold. If we try to install democracy without that economic development taking place first, we will simply be handing over these countries to the Islamic extremists, because that's who will get "elected" by the relatively poor--relatively uneducated--ticked off--and therefore highly vulnerable to religious manipulation--masses."

I'm rather skeptical as well, but it's hard for me to believe that we haven't thought this thing through. What of the highly educated Iraqi's who are now residing in the US and Western Europe many of whom plan to return and even now are? Could they not form the basis for a slowly developing middle class? After all, Iraq was doing rather well in this department prior to their many ill advised militarian adventures in the 80's and 90's. The political leadership must, I should think, be mostly drawn from those who remained in Iraq, but the economic leadership could be drawn from these expatriates.

BTW What part will the native Christians play in a future Iraq, do you think?

Dan Lauffer

If those who say we should try and "reform" Islam from within, are you suggesting that we try to change the beliefs of Isalm? This sounds like pretty serious stuff, a whole lot more serious then just changing governments to meet our needs.

I am sure that many in Islam will try to resist the west (USA) decides to start tinkering with their doctrines. This kind of talk will only inflame the Muslim world more and possibly leed to the rise of more terrorism.

Although I am no fan of Isalmic funides, I cannot help thinking how I would feel if some "higher authority" not only invaded my country but also began telling me what to believe- by changing the beliefs of my religion.

The whole idea of America trying to change a whole religion around to suit her needs really puts me on edge. After all, what can be done to Isalm can also be done to Catholicism (Or any other faith for that matter).

Where will it all end?

In Christ,

Robert

Outsiders will never 'change' Islam. Never.

Muslims really do know how to 'roll with the punches,' and--somehow--always survive.

Even the most secularized Muslim, no matter how far afield he or she wanders from Islam, will almost always return to the fold and, even if he or she is pragmatically an agnostic or atheist, he or she is still 'convinced' that "there is no god but Allah."

If you are born a Muslim, you will die a Muslim.

Sonny

Sonny,

"If you are born a Muslim, you will die a Muslim."

That is demonstrably false.

Robert,

To which post are you directing your comments? I certainly don't believe that any outsider can change Islam from the inside or the outside. It is a ridiculous notion. However, it is a characteristic of Islam of which they take some pride that it is adaptable to any culture.

So, here's my question...

Is it adaptable to any form of democracy? If so, can some form of representative government exist in an Islamic country? Modern history might drive one to despair...and there are scarcely any in history. Nevertheless, is it possible from your point of view?

Dan Lauffer

Such was the same question asked of Catholicism less than 100 years ago.

Axios

Show me the data that will prove to me that my statement is "demonstrably false."

Christian missions to the Muslims have failed miserably, which is why many churches no longer even attempt to evangelize Muslims since they evangelize in vain.

It seems--especially in North America and Europe--that the Muslims are far more effective and successful evangelizers than the Christians, with many high-profile persons freely embracing Islam.

And what of the internal re-evangelization of fallen away Muslims within their own communiites? Especially among the young?

Sonny

Islam and Liberal Democracy by Bernard Lewis

www.theatlantic.com/issues/93feb/lewis.htm [theatlantic.com]

The point must be made that the Central
Asian (Islamic) countries do have a history of a type of nomadic democracy, different than our own, for sure, but nevertheless containing the essence of democratic principles.

Certainly, Bosnia-Herzegovina--which is predominantly Muslim--is a democracy in the European sense.

However, I believe it is more accurate to speak of democracy within contemporary Islam in the sense of nascent democratic principles as opposed to clearly established democratic institutions.

Sonny
Born under the Crescent

Oops!

Dear Professor Dan,

I strongly believe that a marriage between tradition and modernity is possible within the context of a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system of government.

I also believe that the U.S. is beginning to see the value of such frameworks in its own foreign policy.

As for an intelligent polity, Muslims have their own views of U.S. interests in the Middle East . . .

They also have definite ideas about American capitalist culture.

Americans too must come to realize that their own world perspective is a culturally conditioned one, that it is not value-free or "universal" and that modernity and capitalism will not necessarily be an enticement to the acceptance of the American way of life by other nations, even conquered ones.

Alex

Alex and other friends,

We have had a very astute Shia Muslim young man in one of my classes this past semester. His observation on this subject is that: First, ever since the murder of the last true Caliph of Islam in the tenth century there has been a fear of Orthodox Muslims to stand up against the bullies in their midst. In other words, there is no one who can carry enough authority in Islam to enforce any kind of Orthodox Islam in the Ummah. Second, until the most important form of Jihad is taken seriously by Muslims there will never be any kind of peace among Muslims. The Muslim countries are dominated by self centered leaders who do not care for the people. There are four "Jihads" of which the first is the most important. That first Jihad is the interior striving to keep one submitted to Allah. Until true Godly character returns to Islam there is little hope.

And this is from a very faithful Pakistani-American Muslim.

Fascinating.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Professor Dan,

Yes, excellent points!

I hope you gave that young man top marks in your class!

The problem with "orthodoxy" in any religion or political culture is that such often becomes identified with a particular authoritarian figures or set of figures.

To be "orthodox" is to then be in agreement with the authoritarians.

Ultimately, I hope the Muslim nations return to their historic and royal sovereigns.

And I wish the same for your country too!

Alex

He's a very good student.

In contrast to this student some of the Muslims who have taken my course have either been unfamiliar with their religion or have been defensive over most everything I've said about Islam. This young man is a gem.

Concerning a monarchy in the US, as I've often said, if I had been alive during our revolution I probably would have been a Tory.

Dan Lauffer