Oops, never saw this comment the first time.

One thing worth noting is that the original reformation was actually highly reactionary. I'd say the rise of political Islam, such as it is rising, is a reformation of sorts.

So I don't think that's the model we want.

Another point is that western civilization, such as it is, is doing just fine. There's a lot of dialogue internal to the Islamic and Arab world that we really aren't privy to, and can't do much to effect. Best to help set up the frameworks to let it happen.

Anyway, a bunch of very smart Arabs have put together two great human development reports on reform in the Arab world, I suggest we help implement them.

One thing I think we cannot do is enact idiotic sanctions policies like the one on Syria ... the way to combat reactionary thinking isn't to wall off these countries and let them rot. I say more trade. At the rate the population of the Arab world is growing, GDP per capita will continue to shrink unless we figure out a way to kick it up a notch.

There's a lot of latent economic power in the region, but it's hard for potential entrepreneurs to get loans. We need to wean the region from the under-the-mattress economy.

Just as building private sector capacity and increasing content flows is important, so too is building the capacity of governments to actually enforce laws, collect taxes, and provide social services. A higher functioning state will obviate the need for groups like the Muslim Brothers to step in where the government fails. One interesting thing to note about Egypt is that the government is shockingly effective at repressing dissidents, but utterly inept at simple tasks like processing visa applications. Why?

USAID needs to get out of the infrastructure business altogether and into the institution-building business. That's the good stuff.

Etc.

Joe,

You may find this entry of mine relevant to the question you pose.

>>I say more trade.

I second the motion. Blockading Communist countries was/is ridiculous. Same with Islamofascism.

>>One interesting thing to note about Egypt is that the government is shockingly effective at repressing dissidents, but utterly inept at simple tasks like processing visa applications. Why?

That's easy: priorities. Dissidents threaten those in power, whereas bureaucratic inconveniences which annoy peasants and tourists do not. You can't get the visa people fired, so you don't matter.

It would be unreasonable to expect an unaccountable state (almost a redundant phrase) to function otherwise.

>>USAID needs to get out of the infrastructure business altogether and into the institution-building business. That's the good stuff.

USAID can start by rebuilding USG institutions. When the Pentagon has a functioning accounting system, then maybe we can talk about fixing institutions where people don't speak English.

Take away their unearned income, notably from oil. Make them earn their money the hard way - from the bottom up, as opposed to from the top down.

The oil income of Islamic societies is a golden shackle to the past.

Imagine my surprise to fire up WoC this morning and see THIS post! :)

I hope this thread spurs some excellent discussion!

Also, I pointed out a few people in my original comment as those I'd love to see weigh in, but there really are lots of people here at WoC who's opinions I think are excellent and worthy of consideration, so please just assume your thoughts would be appreciated.

Some of these questions are taken up in an enlightening RAND study titled: Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies by Cheryl Benard.

I think there are several things we can do to help reform in the region:

--Get behind the reformers who are already there

--Offer support that they can use

--Acknowledge publicly the steps they're taking

--Counter inaccurate criticism of them

--Get involved in organizations that are working to enhance reform

--Encourage--and enable--exchanges between their countries and the US.

--Stop racist attacks on stereotypes

--Try to learn where they're actually coming from before we tell them how to get where we want them to go

--Write reasoned letters to the editors of their media that encourage reform without blasting them for every stupidity, but point out the stupidity.

I'm tracking and commenting on political and social reform in Saudi Arabia at my blog Crossroads Arabia.

Entrepreneurialism has never been lacking in the Middle East. It has worked for Centuries. The problem is really the coercive social structure. The paternalism defining this structure is hard to change because change is apostasy to the overarching cultural/religious paradigm. That paternalism is rooted in an illiterate rural tribalism, not in urban Mafia cabals.

Islamic culture has endured uniquely for several thousand years without much change. It is foolhardy to think a Western ‘can do’ attitude is going to create much of a dent.

If the Enlightenment can’t be superimposed on this archaic model directly, then perhaps the dynamics created by the Reformation can. That is to encourage and closely control incentives for industrialization that will transform the Middle East from a rural to an urban society. Of course, the cathartic effect of this process is one of the things offending the Wahabists so the chaos will likely get worse before it gets better. Sometimes this is the only way change occurs, something like tectonic plates moving at their fault line, or to switch metaphors, Rolfing on a grand scale. We can’t really control these forces, but neither can the Wahabists stem the tide. This goal is less ambitious than trying to change Islam directly or to win ‘hearts and minds’, but at least it has historical precedent.

Entrepreneurialism has never been lacking in the Middle East.

Try getting a loan.

Funny, I was thinking of a similar question this morning: in all the complaints about GWB going into Iraq, from left and right, I can recall few concrete alternative proposals that seemed even faintly plausible. Pointers to these on the web would be appreciated as well. (They may be suggestions made before hand or in retrospect)

There should actually be some overlap in the two groups of answers.

Talking Stick,

Arab oil income reinforces the coercive social structure.

Hi, thanks to everyone who has taken the time to comment thus far. I have some follow-up observations and questions (sorry I can’t go into more / better detail here but I’m trying to squeeze WoC in between a few zillion meetings):

Praktike
- Do you have any links for further investigating the human development reports you mentioned?
- Re: sanctions policy. I tend to agree with the concept of greater trade = positive political evolution. Theoretically, the more integrated you are in the world economy, the more exposure your people have to the world at large (thereby encouraging moderation). Nevertheless, there are some who might argue that economic sanctions have worked in encouraging a positive change in behavior in some nations (e.g., South Africa, or in helping to stop the civil war in Southern Sudan). Is it fair to write this approach off entirely? (Note – I really hope this thread doesn’t take a sideways trip down the “economic sanctions: good or bad” path).
- “Institution building” sounds like much like “nation building” to me. How do you help build effective institutions in places where they may not be interested in your assistance and / or fundamentally believe that sharia is the best possible legal system with no need for change?
- It seems to me that, at least in some cases, creative minds have worked their way around the “getting a loan” problem. Sorry, I don’t have time to dig up links – anyone else know more about this?

Abiola
- Apologies, a quick scan of the link provided didn’t appear to take me somewhere of obvious relevance. Can you be more specific as to which item I might wish to look at?

Ev
- Excellent link, thanks. Don’t have time to read it right now, but I will later tonight. Looks like it may provide a lot of proposals of the nature I was hoping to see.

John
- In what concrete ways would you propose we get behind reformers who are already there, and what kind of practical support to you believe they could best use?

Talking Stick
- I would tend to agree somewhat. But I also believe it is possible for a small number of people to change the world if they go about it the right way. History is full of examples. We may not be able to control the forces of change, but we certainly can encourage (and hopefully accelerate) those processes which are positive, can’t we? If so, where would we start? What’s one or two concrete things that would help?

“Entrepreneurialism has never been lacking in the Middle East”.
Try getting a loan.

I appreciate your wry cynicism, praktike. I just go to my Sheik whenever I need capital. Of course, for those with bad credit, there is always kidnapping.

How do you help build effective institutions in places where they may not be interested in your assistance and / or fundamentally believe that sharia is the best possible legal system with no need for change?

The short answer is that only a few places in the ME believe that sharia is the best possible legal system with no need need for change.

The other short answer is: change the things you can.

Here's a link to the UN Arab Human Development Reports.

They are excellent, and I urge you to read them.

Good questions. I tried to put together some thoughts on the first few questions a while back
in an essay on winning hearts and minds
I'm not sure what I as a private citizen can do. I'll have to think about that some more. (and talk to the folks at the African Languages Department to see what's involved in learning arabic)

In my opinion, an important element lacking in the Middle East is trust outside of one’s group or family. I have seen the same thing in Russia. Without trust, many of the interrelationships and objectives we take for granted are just not possible. In the economic context, what is needed is an impartial judiciary regulating clear tort guidelines. I think it is easier to get consensus in this area than in the touchier areas of religion and tribal authority. So I think any effort at reforming this area has a possibility of shaping social reform in the longer term, and I am thinking specifically about the womens’ role in society.

“Arab oil income reinforces the coercive social structure.”

Yes it does, Tom. One can’t deny the historical role of oil. Oil expands the power base while inoculating it from a need for change, but I can’t see how it changes the structural model. Before oil, camels created the currency.

I recommend , The Kingdom, by Robert Lacey, about the rise of the House of Saudi from its rise in the Southern deserts through the discovery of oil; fascinating

"Apologies, a quick scan of the link provided didn’t appear to take me somewhere of obvious relevance. Can you be more specific as to which item I might wish to look at?"

The point I was getting at is that we need to focus on the ideological struggle as much as the military one, and this in part means being able to debate with the enemy on his own turf and win. Part of achieving this end will require a move away from supposedly "pure" takes on Islamic teaching towards less literal interpretations, and one strong argument to justify such a move is precisely what I outlined in the linked post.

I know this suggestion doesn't have the immediacy of being able to say "build a power station here" or "provide a bank loan there", but one must keep in mind that the struggle against Communism wasn't won mainly via bribery or on the battlefield either, but in the minds of men. Books like "Darkness at Noon" and "The Gulag Archipelago" did far more to convince the citizens of the workers' paradise that theirs were states unworthy of defending than did F-16s and Abrams tanks, and I expect much the same will be true with Islamist extremism - unless the "Nuke Mecca" brigade ever get the holy war they're thirsting for, that is.

“The point I was getting at is that we need to focus on the ideological struggle as much as the military one, and this in part means being able to debate with the enemy on his own turf and win.”

“…did far more to convince the citizens of the workers' paradise that theirs were states unworthy of defending than did F-16s and Abrams tanks, and I expect much the same will be true with Islamist extremism - unless the "Nuke Mecca" brigade ever get the holy war they're thirsting for, that is."

Abiola, I agree direct considerations toward the ideological conflict are due. However, your further snide and supercilious remarks betray your position and suggest an inability to be objective. So, if you would like to harden positions, I assure you the limited use of nukes in the Middle East is a last ditch scenario, I fully support. Right now the West is falling over backwards to avoid calling the Islamist assault a religious war. I am not so sure it isn’t. Rest assured, I only drool on Fridays.
………………………………………………………………………………………………

“…keep in mind that the struggle against Communism wasn't won mainly via bribery or on the battlefield either, but in the minds of men. Books like "Darkness at Noon" and "The Gulag Archipelago" did far more to convince the citizens of the workers' paradise that theirs were states unworthy of defending than did F-16s and Abrams tanks, and I expect much the same will be true with Islamist extremism…”

I am not so convinced about your premise regarding the persuasive power of books in the Middle East. Perhaps in the broader sense of literary revival in the nexus of 'Old Beirut' and Cairo, maybe. Abiola, I suspect you are an academic. Maybe you know more about the history of propaganda than I. However, comparing the rich Russian literary tradition to the Middle East is hard to swallow. The Koran itself is antithetical to an intellectual tradition, not to mention the comparative literacy levels between the two cultures, cultural paradigms, notions of progress, etc.

Abiola, your final remark really threw me. It is clear Soviet Russia was bankrupt and could no longer afford the accelerating military competition with America,. This caused Soviet authority to implode. Political forces then took advantage of weakness to further undermine Soviet authority, and fill the political vacuum. Already in the in the 50’s, Khruschev exposed the fallacy of Stalin’s doctrine. Subversive books confirmed what the powerless proletariat already lived and experienced under dictatorship, and reinforced a rebellious need for free expression. I suspect such books had more influence outside the USSR in shaping opinion than within, but I defer to scholars on this point.

BooPear I think one of the first things we can do is NOTICE that things are in flux and add non-snarky words of support. Letters to the editors of Arab papers--even the English-language ones--showing that one understands the difficulty of change and applauding the willingness of some to come out public to challenge the received wisdom really does help. Not only does it encourage the people writing, but it also shows the readers that Americans are concerned and are willing to acknowledge good things.

What doesn't help is to keep beating dead horses and shouting "Change or we'll nuke you!" surprizingly... And the line "Good, but could do better" is already a bit overused by the WH. Let them use that tactic. Yeah, it's true, but do you need constant reminders?

Further advantages of writing letters like this is that it gets column inches away from America haters, shows that there are multiple sides to arguments in the US, and demonstrates that all of America isn't out to get Arabs or Muslims as a group.

There are also--sit down now--some very effective US government programs, like the Middle East Peach Initiative. This is a cooperative program where countries identify problems they'd like help in solving and the US lends them (or sends them) experts to help out. The Saudis have asked for help in curriculum development, believe it or not.

You can encourage your congresscritters to support and expand programs like this. You can ask them for more money for the Fulbright exchange programs. You can also ask them--or try peeing up a rope, your choice--to get off their soapboxes from which they denounce all things Arab or Muslim.

Talking Stick Lacey's book was okay for its time--though a bit intemperate, I think. A new book out recently is Thomas Lippman's Inside the Mirage. But even this is a bit dated as Lippman's last visit to Saudi Arabia was in 2002.

Praktike's link to the UN Human DevelopmentReport is very useful. That report hit the Middle East like a bucket of cold water. It actually shamed governments into a hard look at what they were--and more importantly weren't--doing. And shame is a very powerful tool in the region.

One of the things that got them was that Spain was publising more books in one year than the entire Arab world. And translations? The Arab world was nowhere on the map.

These countries do know they've problems. But they have to balance the speed of reform with how fast their people can swallow it. Each country has a different speed limit. We need to recognize that, but still push them to try to increase the pace.

Picking up on John's last point-

For a micro-example of how content flows can swamp a culture, there's a 16-year old Iraqi girl who recently posted a rather skeptical view of the role of women in western cultures.

There's an Australian guy who just went way, way overboard in comments, and the host said they gave her nightmares. All of this yammering and all of these potentially offensive or seemingly bizarre ideas can be a lot to handle all at once.

Abiola --

Again, sorry for the misinterpretation. I was not saying I went to the link and found what you wrote there irrelevant. I'm saying that when I click on the link I go to 2blowhards.com, to an article which starts like this:

"Women and Food, Cont.

Dear Vanessa --

At the local gourmet-food superstore a short while ago, I noticed something I've often noticed before:

Women in gourmet food stores are far more likely than men to help themselves to food-goodies as they shop."

etc.

Scrolling further down the page, neither do I see any other items with content such as you elaborate on in your last post. All I meant to say was, I was not receiving the message I think you wanted to convey.

The point you raise here is a good one, and I fully agree that the ideological struggle is key. My own thinking is that winning that battle is, in the long run, much more important than any military victories.

So, what I'd like to know is: what things do we do to tip the ideological balance in a more favorable direction? Surely there must be some actions we can take that would make a difference, no matter how small at first. Any thoughts?

Tom

- In practical terms, though, it does not appear as though taking away the oil income is likely to happen, whether that would be for good or not. As long as oil is still needed (and they're still in power), the Saudis and others will continue reaping the benefits. Plus, there are awful Islamic states (Afghanistan under the Taleban, for example) who had no such revenue, and they still managed to have a pretty negative impact well beyond their borders. Do you think there a way we can help encourage Muslim states with large oil revenues to use them in a more productive manner?

Talking Stick

- That is interesting, and I think also harkens to Praktike's point regarding building institutions. There is no question a functioning and independant judiciary is a prerequisite for a state to be successful in the long term. Any thoughts as to how we in the West might be able to foster bringing such reform about?

James

- The article you linked was very interesting, and certainly fit within the types of ideas I was looking for. In establishing unbiased (at least to us) media sources, my sense is that there is a certain element of “it’s foreign so it must be propaganda” that has to be overcome to maximize success. Otherwise, no matter how good your content is, it may still be ignored. Few Muslim countries have what we in the West would consider a free press. Is that also an area we could target? If so, how would we overcome state objections to doing that?

BooPear,

Islamic states without oil income, including indirect oil income provided by oil-producing Arab states, are much less of a threat than those with oil income.

IMO the Saud clan will cease to rule the Arabian peninusula within ten years and possibly within five. This will be followed, or more likely simultaneous with, a collapse of oil production within what is presently called Saudi Arabia, all due to rebellion, revolt, civil war, civil strife, chaos, anarchy, cats & dogs lying down together, etc. Real biblical stuff, especially concerning oil prices and the world's economy.

Followed shortly afterwards by demographic catastrophe in SA - a halving of its population, mostly refugees & the rest dead. IMO it is more likely that the locals will do it to each than due to outside help, though I expect non-SA meddling will be a factor to some extent.

And a US-supported Shia successor state will soon control most of the oil-producing areas.

At which point a whole bunch of non-Arabs will start having ideas.

BooPear:
Thanks. Yes and no: we can provide remote shortwave radio/internet and maybe some satellite TV (lots of channels needed?), but I can't see most of the most troublesome countries allowing us to set up a newspaper or locally based radio station. And your point is well taken; foreign reporters are subject to expulsion and local reporters to intimidation. So I'm not sure how you get timely local news.
I suspect that most folks still get the bulk of their news via fairly low tech means, so the internet is only a little bit of help.

>>Islamic states without oil income, including indirect oil income provided by oil-producing Arab states, are much less of a threat than those with oil income.

This isn't a particularly revealing statement. If we take away a group's resources, they will be less powerful and therefore less dangerous. We could get the same effect by stealing these people's intelligence.

#27489 Tom Holsinger:

Tom, that scenario is so wrong in so many ways....

The USG is not going to appoint a Shi'a success regime in the Persian Gulf because there's already a Shi'a state there that worrries the hell out of us.

The Saudis aren't going to fall any time soon unless the top leadership gets whacked by assassins. The leadership is extremely popular with the majority of the country, which, anyway, subscribes to a school of Islam that sees the potential of chaos as much worse than even a tryannical government. The Saudi National Guard, which outguns the Army, is utterly loyal to the ruling family. They're not going to permit any usurpers until they're dead.

If the Saudi fields go off line for any number of years, they you should start now investing in buggies, 'cuz you're not going to be able to afford driving anything with a motor.

The Saudis only supply about 17% of US oil; they provide at least 25% for the entire world. The shortage resultling from a zero-bbd production will drive the price of oil through a good number of roofs.

Unless, of course, your positing that the US will "take over the oil fields" and run them for our benefit. Well, that idea has the advantage of a bit more moderate than nuking Mecca, but not much....

John:

Actually according to this the Saudis supply about 14% of US oil and the proportion appears to be falling. Your point is well taken. The world market for oil will see to it that regardless of the sources from which we obtain our oil should the Saudi fields go offline for any period of time the price would rise dramatically. I'm not so sure about the buggie thing but there would certainly be substantial disruption.

BooPear: I really liked your other comment about macro-evolution vs Darwinian evolution, or as i prefer, genetic evolution vs memetic evolution.
:-)
At the lowest, most basic level, what is a culture made of? Memesets, right? Genetic change is slow, slow, but memetic change can happen at speed-- a good example is the blogverse.
All the things proposed here have merits, but which have the best cost-performance ratio? Visual and aural memes are the most potent, but memetic engineers have to be subtle, so's not to turn off the receptors. That's why 'hate speech' is so ineffective-- it shuts down the memetic receptors. For example, yelling at muslims for implicitly condoning horrific acts, or pointing out fallacies in Islam, aren't terribly effective ways of changing memes.

jinnderella:

Thanks, but as much as I'd like to take credit I think that concept was actually raised by someone else (I took a quick scan at the comments but didn't see who).

Memetics is a subject that I know precisely nothing about, but a concept I nevertheless find quite intriguing, particularly as it may apply to Islam. We all know ideas can change the world, right?

I’ve noted a lot of people out there in the blogverse who argue that Islam is very resistant to change (for a lot of very good reasons), if not impervious, and that therefore other means are necessary (nuke Mecca being at the furthest end of that bell curve). My own view is that, people being people, nothing is impossible if we approach it the right way. Difficult, sure, but not impossible. Even ‘reforming’ Islam.

I’d be very appreciative if you could point me in the direction of somewhere I might explore this concept more fully. If you also have some thoughts as to what it would take to establish and effectively propagate a meme that might be effective in nudging Islam in a more… productive direction, I’d also love to hear them.

"...the UN Arab Human Development Reports.

They are excellent, and I urge you to read them."

A critical element of these is that they were largely written by Arabs, and have been widely discussed in the Arab world.

"I suspect such books had more influence outside the USSR in shaping opinion than within, but I defer to scholars on this point."

Samizdata had great power.

Gary: Something that had great power for the Soviets during the cold war was their massive publication program, in indigenous languages. India was papered--wall to wall--with cheap books, texts and otherwise--that an average Indian could afford, i.e., pennies.

The USG could never equal that. Public diplomacy, which saw it greatest budgets under Reagan, tended to depend on publishers' discards. The number of books we'd translate into Arab, for instance, never exceeded 24 books in a given year.

There was--and continues to be--problems with censorship in the receiving countries. That can be circumvented now via e-books, or simply ASCII text like the Gutenberg Project produces. It's a matter of money, of course, because US authors and publishers--somewhat understandably--want to get paid for their work.

I think language republication is worth at least a significant portion of what we're spending on radio and TV to the region.

BooPear: My bad. I can't find it either-- maybe I dreamed it?
But since this is your thread, you can twist my arm to talk about memetics! :-)
There is a large body of work starting in the eighties on memetics (or 'culture genes' as Wilson first called them). Dawkins and Wilson are two of the founding fathers. The basic premise is that the population genetics equations that work well to measure transmission and diffusion of genes in populations can be applied also to memes.
The trick of memetic engineering is being subtle-- you want to spoof the receptors. For example, delineating qu'ranic quotations about beheading and the opression of women does nothing to persuade muslims that their beliefs are wrong-- the orientation of the receptors won't allow it. But a lot of things John and I talked about on the other thread would make good memetic engineering applications. I'll let John come up with an example for his views-- here is one from mine.
Everyone can agree the position of women in the ME could use improving. I've been researching the female na'qaat (tribal combat poets) from the Jahilyyah. These women would stand between the battle lines of two tribes arrayed for combat, and in elegant, heinously crafted verse, declaim against the adversary. Some are creditted with preventing jizziya combat by causing the opposing tribe to fall from their saddles with laughter, and the Sheik to retreat in humiliation. Now here is the meme extant in the population we'll work on-- (Arabs have a proud cultural tradition of poetry). We'll publish a pamphlet of poetry and stories, hoping to change the meme to read (Arabs have a cultural tradition of poetry AND some of the greatest poets were women). IMHO this would work better than blanketing the ME with pamphlets blaring women to be the equal of men, which is probably the tradional propaganda approach. That's a small example of active memetic engineering.
Of, course, like praktike says-- "Another point is that western civilization, such as it is, is doing just fine. There's a lot of dialogue internal to the Islamic and Arab world that we really aren't privy to, and can't do much to effect. Best to help set up the frameworks to let it happen." passive memetic engineering goes on all the time. But there are ways to speed it up we could be investigating.

jinnderella,

Thanks! Obviously I have no basis to evaluate the idea from the standpoint of someone who knows anything about it -- but from a "common sense" standpoint, what you've said rings quite true to me.

Couple an idea such as yours, with what John raised in the post right before it. Propaganda per se may not always be effective -- but making available cheap, widely distributed, culturally (and politically) sensitive reading materials that tweak things in the right direction... I think that is an idea VERY worthwhile exploring further.

Does anybody know if there are any govt. or private efforts along these lines already underway?

BooPear: What John said is very true. For something I'm writing, I wanted a historical book on arabic poisons. I was able with an arab friend's help and research to find the Kitaeb al Suneam (Book of Poisons), a 14th century treatise by an early arab physician-- but only as an english translation from Sanskrit-- all arabic copies had long since been destroyed. That is one way the qu'ran preserved it's purity-- all other literature was purged from the culture. A caliph from that time frame is reported to have said, "...There shall be no other books besides the Qu'ran, which contains all knowledge, because either they only reproduce what the Qu'ran says, or they contradict it, and must be destroyed."

BooPear: Here is something I read in this excellent article which Charles at LGF linked yesterday from the Asia Times-- One thing the article says:
"To begin with, Maududi did not accept Islam as a religion - a term used by traditionalists in all societies, whether Christian, Jew or Muslim, when referring to divine guidance. Instead, Maududi introduced the Koranic term addin (the way of life). The Koran, he argued, never used din (way of life) alone. Whenever the Koran speaks about Islam it calls it addin ." This is the point I tried to make with Gary-- Islam is not really just a religion, but an entire system, and as such, far more resistant to change of any sort.

Ummm, actually I think this sort of negates Bjorn Stark's issue's over banning Islam as a religion-- how can a "way of life" be banned, and, more importantly, should a religion that is really an addhin (way of life) enjoy the legal and cultural protection afforded to a "religion"? The "religion" part of Islam is probably not what attracts hate-speech, but the radical elements of Islam inside the Trojan Horse of religion.