A Middle East Marshall Plan: Overcoming Obstacles

Will's comment to the previous post entitled "Stemming Extremism: An Economic Solution" pointed out that a Marshall Plan for the Middle East would be difficult to achieve in light of government corruption. Moreover, he stated that countries such as Saudi Arabia have vast wealth that is hoarded by a few elites, utilized to finance personalized Boeing jets, yet unavailable for the development of the economy and the creation of jobs for the hoi polloi.

Like anything else, big plans must start small and branch out. The best place to start with a serious Marshall Plan that would also bolster US standing in the Middle East, would be the West Bank. Years of negotiations have failed to produce a Palestinian state and it is thus time to flip the Rubik's Cube over and try to solve the I/P conflict in a different way. Solving the I/P conflict would do wonders for US/Arab relations in the Middle East, removing an oft-repeated reason for Western hatred and demonstrating that peace is possible between Jews and Muslims.

Vast economic aid to the Palestinians aimed at building a veritable infrastructure in the West Bank would do wonders for the Palestinians. Vast building projects would keep people occupied for years and provide much needed jobs and cash as Palestinians create great cities in the West Bank, similar to Jerusalem. While such a program should be concomitantly pursued in Gaza, Hamas' takeover of the area may obviate such a possibility for the foreseeable future; however, with serious economic growth in the West Bank, Palestinians in Gaza may force Hamas to alter its views and pursue a model similar to the West Bank, or overthrow the government and call for the reinstatement of Fatah.

The type of Marshall Plan I am proposing is outside of traditional theoretical paradigms of how to deal with the I/P conflict. Traditional thinking has said that we must negotiate a solution to the I/P conflict and then work to build an economically viable Palestinian state, thus perpetuating the conflict as repeated failed negotiations have led to despair and poor economic conditions, providing new recruits to extremist organizations. Why not simply assume that today is the day after a solution and the Palestinians must frenetically commence to build up their infrastructure? And once a viable economy is established, Palestinian leaders will have the support of their people to make compromises for peace that will, hopefully, pave the way for full economic cooperation among the Arab States and Israel. One of the biggest obstacles to peace has been the lack of strong Palestinian leaders like Anwar Sadat who had the courage to make peace with Menachem Begin at Camp David.

If successful, such an economic rejuvenation model can be transplanted to other regions of the Middle East, where poor economic conditions have created varying pathologies, among which is the willingness of youth to join extremist groups such as Al Qaeda.

Dealing with Saudi Arabia and her people is a very complex issue; however, I do believe once a Marshall Plan paradigm is created in the West Bank, the Saudi royal family will have to react positively, especially if Saudi Arabians demand the same for their country. The Saudi royal family may also jump on board if a vast economic plan for the Middle East means that the country on a whole will benefit dramatically, providing the mullahs with additional, heretofore unforeseen cash possibilities.

From a historical point of view, it is interesting to re-examine the Muslim Golden Age where Muslims made vast contributions to the betterment of mankind and were an integral part of a Mediterranean/European trade nexus. The point to think about is how can we bring back those days of old. What can be done to jump start a true renaissance in the Middle East? The key, I believe, is a Marshall Plan that starts with the West Bank.

Stemming Radicalism: An Economic Solution?

Will's comments are right on. We need increased religious education in the U.S. so that students are better prepared to deal with disparate peoples they encounter in our increasingly globalized, hyper-interconnected world. Will's ideas can be implemented through educational legislation passed by the House, Senate and local government to increase the time spent on teaching about other religions. Such change can be achieved by lobbying politicians and creating grassroots movements focused specifically on education.

One question it would be interesting to address, however, is what fuels radicalism? The reason the question is so fascinating is because many believe that if we can understand the root reason people become radicalized we can work to prevent such radicalization in the future, even if we might not be able to affect change in those who have taken the path of extremism.

Scholars, of course, have written extensively on this very question and the answers provided range from discontent with encroachment of Western, materialistic ideals into Muslim countries, to frustration centering around the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict, to desperation in light of living in societies where jobs are scarce and living conditions poor, to extreme religious indoctrination from a young age.

One of the great questions which fascinates me is whether true economic investment in the Middle East could prevent individuals from joining the likes of organizations like Al-Qaeda, or whether such a proposal is merely wishful thinking and other solutions must be pursued. I do believe, as do many others, that economic prosperity is often the catalyst for moderation and avoiding violence.

The idea would be to provide vast aid to Muslim countries--a Marshall plan of sorts--to help them build up extensive infrastructure, thus providing jobs to the people on the ground, leaving less time for radicalism. This would not be money provided with democratic strings attached. We would not attempt to tell these countries how they should be run, but rather provide detailed plans on how infrastructure and jobs could be created, hopefully creating an economic incentive to eschew terrorism and extremism, as people would be more involved with working in building up their own countries.

Do you think such a plan could work or is even necessary? Why do you believe people join extremist organizations like Al-Qaeda and how do you think we can work to prevent such affiliations in the future? What do you believe it would take for people in the Muslim world to change their perceptions of the United States?

We need talk

I work a regular blue collar job at a local paint store during the week. Just from dealing with the public on a regular basis, I can tell that we are in dire need of some dialogue. The lack of understanding that I encounter everyday is frightening. Muslim, terrorist, and Taliban are terms used interchangeably without a flinch. Our culture has to be revised and reevaluated if any progress is going to be made.
I think a good place to start is real religious education. Not just education of one's own theology, but having a true understanding of the theology and historic roots of all religions, especially our three Abrahamic faiths. One conservative talk radio show host commented "...we shouldn't call them Muslims, we should call them Jesus-impaired..." This convinced me that there is a wide audience of listeners who are not aware of the fact that Jesus is a prophet of Islam, and the Islamic mystics have a collection of saying and stories about Jesus that rivals the size of the Hadith. It is almost impossible, in my opinion, for a Christian who understands the roots of his/her religion to be so judgemental and lack any sense of compassion. Christianity was once a renegade religion before the fourth century. Christianity was created as a counter-culture movement, and I am afraid that the religion has been so removed from that concept, and so established, that we no longer have compassion for minority religions in our country. Also, let us not forget that early Christians considered themselves "spiritually Jewish." According to the letters of Paul, baptism into the Christian faith is a spiritual circumcision, so Christians, although not ethnically Jewish, have entered into the same covenant with God that the Jewish people have. According to the Vatican II Council, the Jewish people remain the chosen people of God and followers of the faith are guaranteed paradise just as Christians are. Therefore it seems ridiculous, on a theological basis, that Christians should have any animosity towards Jews.
The relationship between Muslims and Jews, from a theological perspective, should also have no grounds for confrontation. As a matter of fact Islam and Judaism are so close in their theology and practices, it makes Christianity look like the outsider. From the concept of Tawheed to dietary laws, Muhammad's religion is really strikingly close to that of Abraham. According to the Qur'an Jews and Christians are promised paradise as well, as long as the recognize tawheed and so on. Sura 2.62 reads "...Indeed, those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians (the religion of John the Baptist)- Any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with the their Lord; On them there shall be no fear, and they shall not grieve." In Judaism as well there is a concept of the righteous gentile, after all Ruth was a Moabite.
So from a theological perspective, is there any basis to hate each other? I would argue that our religion's have been hijacked by people who do not understand the purpose of faith. I believe religion is meant to provide us on earth a means of making society cohesive, not hostile. The best way to come to this conclusion is to study the faiths of other, and put that in context with yours, and I think many of us in this country, and world over, will be surprised with what we find.