Category Error: Attacking Norway for Pearl Harbor

Bahukutumbi Raman, in a recent dispatch labeled “PAK ARMY & ISI: DANGEROUS MIX OF HUMILIATION & DESPERATION”, warns that Pakistan may be planning to redeem itself by orchestrating a successful strike against India, especially in the contentious Kashmir region.

No doubt, Pakistan’s citizens are seriously concerned about the ability of their government and armed forces to protect them. No doubt there has been talk on the streets of intelligence failure at best or illicit collusion with the Americans at worst.

Yet, all this follows a familiar pattern. Most military incursions into sovereign territory for any reason are done in stealth. The inevitable questions and accusations follow. Did Roosevelt know about Pearl Harbor in advance? Did Bush know about 9/11? And in her column in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick accuses Ehud Barak, Israel’s Defense Minister of failing to anticipate trouble along the country’s Syrian border on Nakba Day.

The truth is, no government can promise ironclad security to its citizens. A successful strategy, however, must involve the threat of consequences for anyone intending such a move. If Pakistan were to attack India in the wake of its so-called ‘humiliation’, such redemption would be short lived. For one thing, India had nothing to do with the bin Laden raid.

President Bush underwent a hell of tortures for his decision to attack Iraq in the wake of 9/11. His opponents constantly labeled it as “the wrong war”. In the end, rightly or wrongly, it proved to be his undoing.

My own sense of Pakistan’s leadership is that it is too mature to attack India as a direct consequence of the U.S. bin Laden raid. It has far better options: Turning its focus away from Washington to cooperating more with China is one. If India is attacked, it will not be because of anything that happened in Abbottabad.

I wish I had a similar degree of confidence in America’s foreign policy.

He Did Not

It does seem like many Americans must be hit in the head with two-by-fours before they finally realize what’s actually happening. The trouble is that a blow like that is also likely to render the victim unconscious. It is now clear that ever since 9/11, some - if not most - of us have been rendered unconscious. This is not to say that the forces that are bedeviling us today had not been gathering long before the towers came down. 9/11, however, should have served as a wake-up call. It didn’t.

I am amused by reports that consistently prefix their findings with words such as ‘unexpected’ and ‘surprising’. There were many who predicted exactly where we were headed years ago. I myself remember saying that Barack Hussein Obama was destined to chauffeur the hearse to America’s final resting place. We seemed to be okay with that.

9/11 was an attack on what? America’s source of strength: its economy (and to a lesser extent on its military). It succeeded in bringing down the manifestation of that strength in unambiguous, most spectacular fashion. Less of our people died in the Japanese attack on Peal Harbor than did on 9/11. You would think that that would have meant something. Instead, our government to this day still has a problem in defining the enemy. And as such, it’s strategy is in disarray: unfocused, scattered, ad hoc, and - in large part - turned in against itself.

Bush meant well when he said, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” Almost immediately our enemies - both here and abroad - sprang into action and began to ridicule him. Our domestic enemies turned out to be far more effective, turning ridicule into high art; a national pastime. They got what they wanted. They gave us Obama.

Now that it’s become clear where our nation is ultimately headed, everyone acts surprised. As a WSJ reader points out today, ‘unintended’ is not the same as ‘unforeseen’. Whereas everything reported today is couched in ‘unintended’ (surprise); nothing was ever so obscure as to escape prediction. We are being attacked on so many fronts, it’s difficult to keep one’s focus. Unless we’re willing to admit (to ourselves) that we’re in a war, and address the enemy appropriately, our fortunes will continue to wane. The ‘mosque on Ground Zero’ controversy is a case and point: Half of us do not recognize that Islam is at war with us, while all of Islam is utterly convinced of it.

Yesterday, the president of the United States spoke out for the first time on the mosque controversy. I wish he had said, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” He didn’t.