Dearest Rachel -
There have been moments in our lives where we managed to forget that conflict – well, perhaps I shouldn't sugarcoat it, and just call it 'war' like I ought to – is the natural state of the world collectively, just as sin is the natural state of individual mankind. When we were getting out of college, the Berlin Wall was falling down, and with the collapse of the Soviet bloc, so too went the Cold War. All that buildup of military muscle, and it never got used (thank God!); now we could direct our efforts toward more peaceful and productive pursuits.
And in fact, we did for a decade. Sure, there were minor conflicts going on here and there, the odd revolt (and, as often as not, the crushing thereof, not that anything ever happened in Tiananmen Square – so please don't come after me, Chairman Xi!) and whatnot, but by and large, it felt like we were entering a new era of lasting peace.
But then, in September of 2001, "some people did something," to quote a certain congressperson from Minnesota, in an example of understatement so breathtaking that even the British are in awe. At which point, we were stuck with being on a war footing again, but not so much against another nation as an ideology – a religion, in fact – and there would be no means to definitively declare victory or negotiate terms of settlement. After all, religions all claim to possess the Supreme Truth (because if they didn't, why would anyone waste their time following them?), and the Supreme Truth neither compromises nor surrenders… because it's the Supreme Truth. Why would the one true God offer his sword to mere mortals?
Nothing would ever be the same thereafter. Not travel (because everything had to be inspected for potential threats, no matter how ridiculous or small), not communication (because the government could be looking over your shoulder at any time, to see if you might be planning something nefarious), not personal interactions (because anyone could be a terrorist, since to think there was a certain 'type' of person who would do such a thing was racist).
Over time, we got accustomed to the newly-enforced privations. It was for our own safety, after all – or so we were told – and so we learned to live with it. Eventually, we even got our man – the 'some person' behind the 'some people' who masterminded the 'something' that happened – and there was much rejoicing.
But our military stayed in the region, to try and 'civilize' the folks in which the man had supposedly been hiding himself (he hadn't, in fact, but was actually caught hiding in a neighboring country that we assumed to be an ally, but that's quite literally neither here nor there), in an effort to prevent such an individual from ever surfacing again. But for that to take place, it would have required uprooting the ideology that spawned him, which had roots in the area extending thirteen or fourteen centuries deep. That wasn't going to happen.
So plans were made to withdraw; there was, after all, only so much that could be done. Indeed, there was a certain line of reasoning that to be too heavy-handed in our occupation might only breed that much more resentment, making future terrorism more likely rather than less. It had to be done carefully, to be sure, but there were preparations made to walk away from the table.
And, in recent memory, some of those moves included making provisions to not have to rely on the countries in the area. Of course, we would be more than willing to carry on commerce with them – nothing supports friendship, particularly on a global scale, as much as mutual economic benefit – but we didn't want to have to depend on any of them in a crunch. You would recognize this behavior when you would go shopping while travelling; when you weren't intent on buying anything, the seller would redouble their efforts in our to attract your business. You had the upper hand in the negotiation when you didn't yourself as having anything at stake.
This served as a brilliant means of bringing various nations in the area to the negotiating table, in order to maintain favor with a power that suddenly didn't actually need them for as much. Everybody was permitted to keep their ideology, but also was expected to acknowledge that those who held differently had their own rights to exist and prosper (and by doing so, allowing those around them to proper) as well. And this sense of cooperation across ideological and religious lines appeared to be growing, and leading to yet another new era of lasting peace.
But that didn't last long at all.
Indeed, since the man negotiating – and the means used to negotiate – were considered so anathema in certain quarters, his successor (who you completely missed seeing; consider yourself fortunate) deliberately set about to undo everything he'd established. It's probably the only success the later man has had since assuming the mantle of authority.
The results speak for themselves; other powers react to the signs of weakness. I've told you about the situation in Ukraine, which is becoming a drawn-out quagmire in which there are likely to be no winners (it looks like Russia is firmly ensconced in Donestk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and the Crimea, but at the cost of a hundred twenty thousand men, which by comparison is more than the U.S. has lost in all military actions taken since the end of WWII combined, over the course of twenty months). Meanwhile China keeps making noises about its "breakaway province," Taiwan (which honestly sounds a lot like Saddam Hussien's verbiage about Kuwait so many years ago. And while we handed him his backside when he tried to pull something back then, China is no Iraq), and now, of all things, Venezuela seems to be desirous of grabbing about two-thirds of Guyana's land, now that oil reserves have been found there (as if Venezuela didn't have enough oil of their own; now they want to mismanage someone else's possible financial windfall).
And then, of course, there's the Hamas-Israeli war.
Not only have I mentioned this before, I've just pointed out that this one is one where there will (and can) be no surrender. This isn't so much about nationhood – well, it is, but it's really secondary to the main issue – as it is about ideology and religion once again. And yes, it's those same people "doing something" again.
Now, as I said, every religion considers itself the repository of Supreme Truth. Some are so sure of their own Truth that they make a point of debating with those of different religions, attempting to use logic and facts to persuade the others of the Truth of their beliefs. To be sure, this renders them vulnerable to being proven wrong and having to convert themselves, but that would seem desirable to do when seeking Truth – if you find it elsewhere, you must go there to claim it for your own. However, there are those ideologies that do not brook dissent; there is no disagreement permitted with the 'fact' that their Truth is the Truth. Anyone who says otherwise is a heretic or infidel to be expelled or – better yet – destroyed, lest their insidious 'lies' infect the established 'Truth.'
Such is the case in this war, much as it was two decades ago.
One of the interesting parts of the whole war is how it seems to have been reported. I've heard claims that Gaza is nothing more than "an open-air prison," with the obvious implication that this is Israel's fault somehow. This, despite the fact that Israel hasn't occupied Gaza since 2005; if anyone is responsible for the conditions in Gaza, it should be the folks running the place since then, i.e., Hamas. But no, somehow they're blameless for not making the effort to clean up and fix up and make the best of the land they've been given (and the donations that have poured in through the U.N. and other various non-governmental organizations, as well as individual charity), even as Israel has improved its lot considerably over that same period. Somehow, this is Israel's fault.
All of which is made worse, of course, by the fact that Israel has invaded Gaza – albeit in retaliation for the massacres at the Nova music festival and various southern kibbutzim nearly two months ago. Israel claims that Hamas' charter literally calls for their own eradication – no 'two-state solution' would ever be acceptable, as the Jews stand in opposition to the Supreme Truth of Islam (and apparently, converting them is out of the question, because they might question those Truths, I guess?) – leaving them with no alternative but to do unto Hamas as they would do unto Israel; sort of a modern-day Purim. Hamas is but a single letter removed from 'Haman,' by sheer coincidence.
But as the Israeli Defense Force have moved in – carefully, so as to extract the hostages taken by Hamas on October 7th if at all possible – there have been those claiming that they are destroying the idyll that Gaza was prior to those attacks:
But wait; I was reliably informed that Gaza was "an open-air prison"! That's why they were attacking their Israeli wardens in the first place, wasn't it? These people don't get to have it both ways.
And here's where it struck me, honey. If we want to perceive it as such, we are well within our rights to consider the entirety of this 'Rock' that we live on to be one giant Alcatraz. It's not as if the concept is without precedent; we've utilized whole continents as prisons in real life; why not look at the entire Earth as a giant, open-air prison?
Yes, it was originally meant to be Eden, but that was a long time ago, and we've long since spoiled that. Since then, we have come to realize that there is no escape from this place. We are surrounded by a near-infinite ocean of absolute nothingness (right down to the lack even of breathable air), with only the tiniest means to leave, developed just within living memory. And if we should manage to leave, where would we go? Any other place within reach is just as – if not considerably more – hostile in terms of environment; although there is the mercy that there would be no people to contend with, at least. But for most of us, we are condemned to a life sentence on this rock, with no option for parole or pardon (save for the one you and so many others have received, not that we remaining prisoners have any comprehension of what that must be like), and no means of escape, either.
Of course, that is the most pessimistic view one could take of existence; and yet, that is occasionally the view of the Gazans, it would seem. It never occurs to them to make the best of where they are, as those of us throughout the world (and even right next door in the Negev kibbutzim) have tried to do. No, they merely cast envious eyes, and like the proverbial crabs in a bucket, reach to pull their neighbors down to their level, and tear them limb from limb for having the temerity of defying the Supreme Truth that this is how it is.
I don't know what to ask for regarding these people, honey, but you might want to keep an eye on the Israelis, and wish them luck. They're going to need it.
No comments:
Post a Comment