RSS

Thu, Apr 28th 2011, 15:03

David Cook, New York University, (7)

The Arab uprisings should be looked at as an opportunity to defeat Al Qaeda. The Egyptian protestors are smart enough to realize that any move towards Islamic extremism is not in their best interests. While there might be some lingering anti-U.S. sentiment (as there is throughout the region), hopefully they will also realize that the U.S. is not the enemy. Unlike in Iraq, this was not an attempt to impose a Western style democracy. The protests were allowed to develop organically and the move towards democracy should be too. Libya is less clear cut, but (for the time being at least) the U.S. is not the main enemy. We can't afford to ignore Al Qaeda, but we also shouldn't give them too much credit. From a realist perspective they are a weak, non-state actor and, by treating them as such, hopefully we can minimize their influence in the region. In the end, the Arab uprisings are about the suppression of human rights and not a protest against American imperialism.

Sun, May 1st 2011, 20:19

Yuliya Edelshteyn, NYU, (8)

Al Qaeda has not been quiet during the uprisings. They came out in support of the protesters in Libya after Gaddafi blamed the revolt on Al Qaeda. There was an explosion in Marrakech just the other day and this past week, the German authorities arrested 3 Al Qaeda members who were putting together a plot. The international community should support the calls for reform in North Africa but we should not forget that these reforms will need to be supported in order for states to become democracies. Al Qaeda should not be ignored because it is a nonstate actor. It is still in existence and it still acts as a nonstate actor. There might be a call within the North African countries for Islamic extremism, however I do not think that anything fruitful will come out of these types of calls.

Thu, Jun 16th 2011, 21:33

Amarjyoti Acharya

When one talks of a 'west' in such fashions, one already creates a problem. Would it be Italy or Greece or even the Vatican? The Al-Qaeda signifies a confused reaction to such confused nomenclatures & easy generalizations. For then one would need to talk of the 'west' versus the 'rest'. The moment one does that it becomes less fashionable since cars still need oil to run upon; kitchens still would need gas and every manufacturer would need a market. While the 'west' would find very few takers over such generalizations. It is crucial to know that terrorism & geopolitics are not TV soap operas just like real wars are not soap operas. If one looks at the cost in human lives and material resources the 9\11 has alone cost the democratic states while newer threats emerge - it becomes quite a sobering thought before one thinks of such things as soap operas. The indirect costs are more enduring and more comprehensive in the US alone. In other parts of the world like India - you have shrill voices that are confused and rather terroristic (even if you discount the religious Hindu fanatic or the Christian fanatic or even the Islamist ones that may confuse the vatican with the west) in their minds & hearts. Apart from the organization & alleged arms of the al-qaeda, they differ precious little. One need be more careful when making such generalizations. They usually prove counterproductive - both the short as well as the long run.