By: Tashbih Sayyed, Ph. D.
Is America safe? No! America is not safe. The United States of America is the victim of its own values. Our commitment to upholding the tenets of our civic religion too often causes us to ignore the not-so-fine line that distinguishes Americans from their enemies. For an America that was conceived in liberty and which has reposed its faith in the principal that all men are created equal, it seems there is no difference between an Al-Qaeda terrorist and an American patriot working overtime to protect the homeland.
The highest court of the US made it very clear last week that it does not matter if terrorists determined to destroy our country are not regular soldiers. Delivering the opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said that Article 3 of the Geneva Convention covered all people caught up in a conflict, even if they were not regular soldiers and not entitled to be treated as prisoners of war. Quoting that section, Stevens said these people must be tried "by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."
America's civic religion was in full play in the Supreme Court declaration that President Bush had overstepped his authority in the war against terrorism. It ruled that he does not have the power to set up special military trials at Guantanamo Bay without the approval of Congress. According to the decision, the planned military tribunals lacked the basic standards of fairness required by the nation's Uniform Code of Military Justice and by the Geneva Convention.
I agree with the ruling that our actions should never be in contravention of our Constitution and that it is of utmost importance that laws should be passed by Congress to deal with the unconventional challenges of the present situation. But I also feel that a criterion of some kind must also be devised to judge those who have become citizens of this wonderful country only to destroy it.
We must realize that the real war to defeat America is not being fought in South Asia, Central Asia or the Middle East, but right here in the United States of America. Our enemies have adopted our ways, our mannerisms, and our language. Understanding our commitment to our values, the enemies of Americanism have become "Americans". They are using our democracy and our freedoms to subvert the very Constitution that is the source of them.
The Supreme Court's ruling highlights the basic observation that we must proceed with utmost caution in fighting this war on Islamist terrorism. By appearing to act outside the boundaries of our own laws, we create an impression that we are hypocrites and do not believe in the foundations of our own civic religion.
Why is it that we say that we are at war but have not been able to declare a state of war? Why are we fighting this existential threat under civil laws that have no provision to treat enemy combatants as what they are? We ought to be realistic. We can't pretend that we are living in times of peace. Failing to identify and understand the enemy threatens us all.
Our enemies have used our failures to paint us as arrogant, undemocratic, and in violation of civil liberties and human rights. Certain American civil liberties groups are doing everything they can to convince American Muslims that the United States is anti-Islam. They have contributed to a perception in many Muslim communities across the world that Americans deserve abductions and beheadings.
The degree to which anti American propaganda has succeeded in turning Muslims against the US was evident in an Al-Jazeera television show that aired after the beheading of an American. Feysal Al Qassem, host of Alti jah Al Muaakess ("Counter Direction"), initiated a debate on savagery.
An Egyptian guest was allowed to advocate, with sickening insistence, the beheading of hostages in Iraq as a legitimate act of resistance to what he called "these American dogs," regardless of the captives' nationality or military or civilian status. They are all mercenaries, the Egyptian man screamed, as Qassem indulged a so-called political commentator's argument that severing heads is an acceptable form of resistance to American occupation and a valid means of teaching America a lesson.
As a result of consistent anti-American propaganda, many of the Arabs and Muslims living in the West with free access to the Internet support such vicious anti-Americanism. According to one recent online poll, less than 10 percent denounced decapitation as a tool against certain hated American policies.
There are a number of American Muslim organizations with lots of money and substantial influence. Many receive substantial support from foreign countries that also support political variations of fundamentalist Islam. All of these Muslim groups claim only to be working to safeguard the civil rights of American Muslims. But if you look carefully at their record, you will find that under this veneer, these groups are often working for those foreign interests that are committed to harming the United States.
Such objectives explain the willingness of these groups to seize every opportunity to undermine America's efforts to defend itself. They also explain why none of these groups have organized a sincere protest against the radical Islamists who have been murdering Americans with impunity around the world.
When Americans are abducted and held hostage, these American Muslim leaders are too often silent about human rights and the Geneva Convention.
When Americans are beheaded, no one demands to know why the international community did not act to prevent the barbaric act. But Americans are the accused, not the victims, Islamist front organizations masquerading as civil libertarians waste no time in gathering an impressive response to alleged American misdeeds.
Writing on this 4th of July, my prayers are that we Americans learn from our mistakes and find a way to protect our land from the enemies of America who have managed to procure American passports.
(Tashbih Sayyed is the Editor in Chief of Pakistan Today and The Muslim World Today, President of Council for Democracy and Tolerance, an adjunct fellow of Hudson Institute, and a regular columnist for newspapers across the world.)
