Andy McCarthy needs you to understand that the reason we're failing in Afghanistan is that the exotic Muslim cannot be swayed from his terrorist ways, and thus McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy is bound to fail. (The term takfir, which he uses here, is the religious doctrine embraced by al-Qaeda that rationalizes the killing of other Muslims):
First, the point of disagreement between the takfiris and other Muslims is primarily over the propriety of killing Muslims. The fact that there is discord between them over that point does not mean the majority of Muslims will side with us over the takfiris. We are non-Muslims, and whatever differences Muslims in general have with takfiri Muslims, their differences with us are more thorough-going and profound.Second, the fact that most Muslims see takfiri violence against Muslims as violative of Islamic principles does not mean that they see takfiri violence (or, indeed, violence by any Muslims) against us as violative of Islamic principles. To the contrary, as I explain in my column, mainstream Islamic ideology (not just takfiri ideology, not by a longshot) holds that infidel military forces operating in Islamic countries must be fought until they are driven out, especially if they are sowing the seeds of Western culture and governance.
[...]
This reflects a central truth about Islam: the unity of the umma, the global Muslim Nation, takes precedence over all. A U.S. strategy built on the premise that mainstream Muslims will be won over to our side against their fellow Muslims in an Islamic country is built on wishful thinking. It's not a question of whether Muslims reject the takfiris' extremism. Muslims constantly fight amongst themselves, often with deadly force. The question is whether such infighting means they will prefer us. They won't — certainly not on a mass scale.
Look, Americans don't see killing people of any religious persuasion as violative of our principles as long as we're doing it in what we perceive as self-defense. Otherwise, we wouldn't be fighting two wars, so the idea that there's something weird about Muslims not having a problem with violence against non-Muslims is dumb. Christians and Jews all over the world don't even need some fancy religious doctrine to rationalize the killing of other people of any religious persuasion despite religious prohibitions against killing, so this complaint is just bizarre.
McCarthy clings to his beliefs that Muslims can't be persuaded to see us in a positive light and terrorists as the bad guys even in the face of widely available empirical evidence -- namely that the Taliban is viewed favorably by a whopping 7 percent of the Afghan population and 10 percent of the Pakistani population. Approval of the U.S. in Afghanistan has been going down since its 2005 high of 83 percent to 47 percent now, but that's still a lot higher than the Taliban. In Pakistan, U.S. numbers are bad at 16 percent, but at the same time 53 percent of the population wants a better relationship with the U.S., so there is potential for improvement.
At any rate, the evidence defies McCarthy's contention that Muslims cannot, by definition, see Americans as allies and terrorist organizations as the enemy."Muslims have lots of complaints about Muslimterrorists, but the thought that this means they'll be coming over toour side is a fantasy," McCarthy writes (someone should explain this to American Muslims). Of course, it's not actually about getting Muslims everywhere to love us; it's about persuading people in Afghanistan and Pakistan that we have mutual interests that can be advanced by cooperating with each other, and that those interests can only be harmed by groups like the Taliban. By participating in the wholesale slaughter of Muslims, they're making a more persuasive argument than the U.S. could ever make on its own. McCarthy would have us follow their lead.
Now whether COIN will work in Afghanistan is incidental to whether Muslims can be persuaded that extremists are bad. The numbers show that they can be. But if you think, as McCarthy does, that there's really not much difference between ordinary Muslims and extremists, then there's no point in persuasion. As a justification for torture and brutality in the fight against terrorism, ("the back-breaking force necessary") McCarthy's arguments resemble nothing so much as the takfir doctrine he's discussing.
UPDATE: I feel like it's important to mention that it's not just about getting countries to side with "us." The U.S. is not occupying Pakistan. And in the past few months, even as disapproval of the United States has deepened, support for more Pakistani military operations in Swat increased, according to Peter Bergen, "from 28% two years ago to 69% today." That's not Pakistanis siding with "us"; it's them siding with their government against the Taliban -- and it makes a difference.
-- A. Serwer
