Obama and the Fundamentalists

 I wish this blog was about a new pop group or boy band. It isn’t. Once again, I am venturing into an area where I struggle to understand the behaviour of some human beings. How will the free world deal with the problem that is the Islamic State, IS?

No doubt, experts will tell me there are several groups of jihadists and fundamentalists who follow a screwed up, vicious and damagingly conservative interpretation of Islam. So be it. This blog uses IS as a collective for all such groups. They disgust me. What form of religion endorses beheading, murder for those who refuse to convert and excludes women from everything except cooking, cleaning and child-birth?

One burning question is, how will the free world respond to incursions by IS into its territory? We can be certain that IS will not limit its operations to Syria and Iraq. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Turkey will have their collective collar felt. And nations who seek to curtail IS activities will soon enough suffer acts of terrorism.

One definition of insanity is to ask the same question more than once, expecting different answers. At the moment, the West is doing exactly that and seemingly content to let the Americans bear the brunt of military action, with help from the British in providing humanitarian relief. Go back to 2001. It is almost a repeat of the Iraq war. Where now is France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa and any other democratic nation which would resist the attempted hegemony of IS? These countries are an imitation of Madame Lafarge.

Would the current situation afford an opportunity to bring Russia back into the fold? Mr Putin might bring a fresh perspective on how to deal with rogue elements in world society. Yes, it goes against the grain to be an ally of his regime but this is politics. And if the Russians have been supplying arms to IS, which I doubt, they might think twice about continuing such a policy.

In this week’s Sunday Times, the editorial proposed action and cunning. Fine, what precisely does this newspaper and certain British politicians advocate? In brief, a repeat of Iraq 2001. With what outcome? The Americans left Iraq with a religiously slanted government in charge and paid a shocking price in thousands of American and Iraqi lives, not to mention a divided Middle East.

What of Afghanistan? We all know the Taliban are biding their time until the Americans leave. What chances are there of the current government remaining in power? If the Taliban took over, would we see the West return and fight with troops on the ground? And yet this is advocated against IS. The trouble is that even if IS are decimated – in the true meaning of the word – there would remain sufficient numbers of these brigands to keep us worried.

I have no solution to the indoctrination issue but it seems to me one possible way forward is to hit groups like IS and the Taliban where it hurts, in the wallet. All free nations opposed to IS, let’s call them the Alliance, should pass laws to enable the following actions.

1.      Cut off the money supply. Outlaw the payment of ransoms to free captured western citizens. I realise this is bad news for those who are kidnapped but they put themselves into danger.

2.      Where possible, seize the bank accounts of IS. Obviously, there are banks in Iran and Syria who hold funds for IS. In those cases, all western banks should refuse to accommodate or deal with those banks until the rogue accounts are blocked. Funds seized could be sent to a specially designated UN account and used to aid refugees fleeing from IS.

3.      Prosecute everyone who provides financial aid to IS. Here, a collective action is vital. IS has to realise that it is not tolerated anywhere in the free world and cannot use the beneficial processes of the West to help in its dirty work. Those convicted of providing aid will receive a life sentence with no parole.

4.      Corporations providing arms and munitions to IS will be prosecuted. If found guilty, the corporation will be heavily fined and placed into compulsory liquidation. The responsible officers will be imprisoned for life, no parole. Any nations approving the supply of arms and munitions will suffer draconian sanctions.

5.      Proscribe IS and all similar groups. Anyone convicted of membership should receive a compulsory life sentence, no parole. The message will be, “Be a martyr by all means but spend your life behind bars, with all the ‘comforts’ a lifer enjoys in a male prison.” I know this is an awful proposal but look at the devastation these individuals can cause. 9/11 and 7/7 are examples.

IS will retaliate. Hostages will be taken and attempts will be made to trade for essential supplies. This should be resisted. There will be military options, too, for the West and nations like Saudi Arabia will support. Only last week, that nation’s leading cleric declared IS as Islam’s greatest enemy. Effectively, IS poses a present and serious threat to the free world. These are not my words. This is what Philip Hammond, the British Foreign Secretary said this weekend.

So, at the risk of being accused of using rhetoric similar to that of IS, let the free world send a message to IS. “Not only will we use our mighty military strength to defeat you, we will also cut off your financial blood supply. We will bankrupt you and starve you of everything you need to pursue your evil aims. If we catch your acolytes in our territories, their lives will be as good as over. Your prescription for life under your Islamic rule is anathema to everything we believe in and we will fight and destroy you.”

I feel so much better for getting this off my chest.