Most commentators found little new or noteworthy in a recent rambling 26-minute long release from Al Qaeda's video production wing. Actually, the tape reveals, arguably more clearly than any of the previous ones, what bin Laden is truly after. He wants nothing less than for all of us to rush out and convert to Islam. In his inimical words, "I invite you to embrace Islam, for the greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah."
This call to join the faith is of great importance because bin Laden has been miscast by some on the left as a sort of a labor union leader, with three specific demands that could be negotiated leading to an end of terrorism. Indeed, in previous tapes, especially the Feb. 23, 1998 release, bin Laden did list three specific demands: he called for lifting the sanctions imposed on Iraq by the U.S. and its allies (in Saddam's days), the removal of U.S. troops from the land of holy Muslim sites (in Saudi Arabia), and the ending of U.S. support for Israel. Among those who called for dealing with Al Qaeda by meeting these demands were MIT world-renowned linguist and leftist super-hero Noam Chomsky; radical Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the prestigious University of California at Berkeley, Chalmers Johnson; and the anemic left-leaning weekly journal, The Nation.
Given that the first two demands have been long met (as of 2003), quite a few progressive people (including a considerable number of hypercritics of Israel) have urged that the last demand should be met so that an accommodation with bin Laden and his partners might be reached.
Actually, for bin Laden, as the most recent tape makes clear, these three specific demands are only a kind of opening move. The fact is that bin Laden and his followers have a strong set of values. They do believe that, if left unchecked, the West will undermine many if not all the moral precepts that they hold dear. They believe that the West is materialistic and cares more about affluence than the after life; that the West is hedonistic and knows little about sacrifices for higher purposes; that the West is individualistic, and does not recognize the importance of family, community, and religious values. Islam (but only a "pure" version, as distinct from the corrupted version currently practiced by many millions of Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere) is held to be the best antidote to all these modernistic ailments.
In 2002, I was a guest of the reformers in Iran. I deliberately spent most of my time outside Tehran, in several towns and villages, including in the holy city of Qom. My conversations with the mullahs reinforced my observations as a sociologist that they firmly believe that the only way to preserve the traditional way of life is for Muslims to have political regimes of their own. Indeed, roughly until 2000, Iran had minimized both tourism and foreign investment, fearing that this type of contact with outsiders would contaminate their youth and undermine their traditional society. When, because of a need for foreign currency, Iran finally did open its gates, it turned out that their fears were not unfounded. Foreigners visiting Iran sought booze, trolled for prostitutes, and imported porn and sexually alluring clothing, all of which caught on especially in the parts of Iran foreigners visit most often, in Tehran.
Moreover, the mullahs held, with the strong convictions of true believers, that they ought to bring the light -- that is, their beliefs and ways of life -- to all others whose souls have not yet been saved. This expansionist, messianic urge forms an important part of their religious conviction. Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are often depicted as substantially different from the mullahs and the Taliban on this point. However, as the recent tape reminds us, the difference is smaller than it has often been depicted.
I have no problem with a society seeking to preserve many of its traditional ways (excluding especially their appalling tendency to treat women as inferior beings). And I see nothing wrong in the mullahs and bin Laden calling on Americans to pick up their faith, just as we call on their people to embrace human rights and democracy. Let there be a dialogue of civilizations (which, by the way, is the name of a Center established by former President Mohammad Khatami of Iran) and let the best ideals and values win.
What we must reject is the use of bombs, guns and other tools of terrorism and war to settle such dialogues. The fact that our government also resorted to these means of violence, and not only in response to being attacked, certainly does not make them right. If bin Laden and company were truly merely out to try to convert us, this is something we should be able to live with. Indeed, it is a challenge we should welcome. However, as long as they continue to lob bombs, whatever their motive, we will have to stop them dead in their tracks.
Amitai Etzioni is Professor of International Relations at the George Washington University and the author of Security First: For A Muscular, Moral Foreign Policy. www.securityfirstbook.com