Let’s Send Britney to Baghdad

Some time ago, and I don’t even remember when or where, I suggested that the best thing we could do to fight terrorism was not bomb Afghanistan but airlift televisions, generators, and Playstation 2s. The suggestion was somewhat facetious, but not by much.

Osama Bin Laden is a menace, a nut, and a crazy person. I am convinced of this. No Playstation, Game Cube, or XBox is going to change his mind. The man already has all the material wealth he needs.

But his shock troops are another story altogether. We could do serious, significant damage to terrorist recruitment efforts by removing the motivation for people to join.

We have known for a long time that poverty creates desperation which creates insecurity. Consider a poor, starving person (Bob) and a rich, well-fed person (Jack). Bob is going to be focused on taking money out of Jack’s pocket and placing it in Bob’s. Jack has all the political and legal authority because he’s rich. Bob has a large rock. Bob is going to hit Jack over the head with it. What does Bob have to lose? Not very damn much.

Now, think of a not-quite-so-poor Bob. A Bob who is not starving, has reasonable transportation, and will probably gets to go out to eat once in awhile. Is Bob going to hit Jack over the head with a rock? Probably not, unless Bob is more demented than usual, because Bob now has something to lose.

This is a radical oversimplification. But it illustrates the basic concept: the more affluent someone is, the more they are concerned about protecting their own affluence. Hitting people over the head with rocks becomes more of a risk.

The problem with both the American and Israeli approaches to terrorism is that it relies on violence and economic warfare. This spreads misery around quite a bit. When Israel plows large regions of Palestine under, they destroy the opportunities and lives of many Palestinian people. When the US issues sanctions against Iraq or Afghanistan, Iraqis and Afghanis are made destitute (in most cases) or killed (in the worst case). And, of course, when military action is taken — especially the so called “shock and awe” military action –civilian lives are destroyed. And every time we do this, more potential terrorists are created.

If we worked more on economic development — directly with the people of a nation if the nation’s dictators won’t cooperate — we could raise standards of living for many people. We could make friends among the common people. Imagine that: if the Iraqi on the street was immune to official propaganda because there was a secret tap of American money coming into the country! It would certainly dampen terrorist recruitment activity. What argument do you think is more effective:

“Hey, the US Government killed your father and your brother. You are living in an unheated house with no wall. US money is being used to prop up a dictator who is ruining the lives of all those around you. God thinks this is wrong, and he wants you to strap bombs around your waist and blow up a bus stop.”

“Hey, the US Government has helped you heat your house and taught your youngest son to read. They’ve given you food to grow and have offered you some money to help spread their evil pro-literacy propaganda. But God thinks Britney Spears shouldn’t show her navel, so you should strap bombs around your waist and blow up a bus stop.”

Will this be difficult to implement? Certainly, but is war any easier?

Will it eliminate all terrorists? Most likely not, but what short of nuking the rest of the world will?

Is it buying our friends? Without a doubt, but with every bomb we drop we are buying enemies.

Will it take a long time? When is the war on terrorism supposed to end anyway?

The only objection I can see to this is it would require spreading prosperity around a little bit — something anathema to a lot of conservatives. Oooo. Redistribution of wealth! We can’t have ANY of that. Much better to shred the Constitution, create a police state, and reduce entire countries to rubble than spread a little money around.

But can you imagine an Africa — a Middle East — a China — with a middle class? People with money in their pockets to buy Playstations and cheeseburgers and life-insurance policies?

There’s much more profit there than there is in radioactive rubble.

Let’s think about that a moment, shall we?