Denis McDonough, the deputy national security adviser, speaks to the northern Virginia Muslim community (and others):
We have a choice. We can choose to send a message to certain Americans that they are somehow “less American” because of their faith or how they look; that we see their entire community as a potential threat—as we’ve seen in several inexcusable incidents in recent weeks across the country that were captured on video. Well, those incidents do not represent America. And if we make that choice, we risk feeding the very feelings of disenchantment that may push some members of that community to violent extremism.
Or, we can make another choice. We can send the message that we’re all Americans. That’s the message that the President conveyed last summer when he was discussing Muslim Americans serving in our military and the need to honor their service. “Part of honoring their service, he said, “is making sure that they understand that we don’t differentiate between them and us. It’s just us.”
Informed by what we know, several basic principles must guide us in what we do—as individuals, as communities and as a country. We must resolve not to label someone as an extremist simply because of their opposition to the policies of the U.S. government or their strong religious beliefs. Under our Constitution, we have the freedom to speak our minds. And we have the right to practice our faiths freely knowing that the government should neither promote nor hinder any one religion over the other.
As such, we must resolve to protect the rights and civil liberties of every American. That’s why, under President Obama, the civil rights division at the Justice Department is devoting new energy and effort to its founding mission—protecting civil rights. It’s why we are vigorously enforcing new hate crimes laws. And it’s why even as we do everything in our power to protect the American people from terrorist attacks, we’re also doing everything in our power to uphold civil liberties.
We must resolve that, in our determination to protect our nation, we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few. In the United States of America, we don’t practice guilt by association. And let’s remember that just as violence and extremism are not unique to any one faith, the responsibility to oppose ignorance and violence rests with us all. ...
Let’s resolve that efforts to protect communities against violent extremists must be led by those communities. Indeed, we’re fortunate that Muslim Americans, including organizations represented here today, have taken an unequivocal stand against terrorism.
Islamic scholars have issued fatwas declaring terrorism as un-Islamic. Like Muslim American communities across the country, the ADAMS Center has consistently and forcefully condemned terrorist attacks. And not only here in the United States. You’ve condemned terrorism around the world against people of other faiths, including Christians and Jews. In so doing, you’ve sent a message that those who perpetrate such horrific attacks do not represent you or your faith, and that they will not succeed in pitting believers of different faiths against one another.
McDonough does everything but say "Peter King, what you are doing is disgusting." But the substantive arguments King brings to bear are confronted and refuted: "The bottom line is this—when it comes to preventing violent extremism and terrorism in the United States, Muslim Americans are not part of the problem, you’re part of the solution."
Another important part of the speech. McDonough, following John Brennan, distinguishes between "al-Qaeda's ideology" and Islam. Why dignify conspiracy theorists with the mantle of one of the world's great monotheisms? If for no other reason but strategy, deny them the religious legitimacy they demand. The consistent countermessage from the Obama team is: the takfiris are the true apostates.
Notice as well that McDonough's approach to the challenge of radicalization treats Muslim communities as at-risk areas, rather than hotbeds of aspirant eschatological murder. (" Every community is unique, and our enemy—al Qaeda—is savvy. It targets different communities differently," etc.) That constructively portrays al-Qaeda as parasitical, rather than an authentic outgrowth of Muslim America or a vanguard of those communities. Notice as well that it implicitly rejects the idea that there's an authentic demand for al-Qaeda within Muslim American communities.
Except. McDonough talks a lot about the continued need for Muslim Americans to cooperate with intelligence and law enforcement. For all the happy talk about Muslims being at risk from al-Qaeda, it would not be unreasonable for Muslim Americans to consider themselves a government target -- not a partner -- as the relationship revolves around national security. That's the sort of thing that corrodes the relationship: injustice. So McDonough says this:
[W]e’ve also recognized that this engagement can’t simply be about terrorism. We refuse to “securitize” the relationship between the government and millions of law-abiding, patriotic Muslim Americans and other citizens. We refuse to limit our engagement to what we’re against, because we need to forge partnerships that advance what we’re for—which is opportunity and equal treatment for all.
So other departments, like Health and Human Services and Education, have joined with communities to better understand and address the social, emotional and economic challenges faced by young people so they can realize their full potential in America. And our U.S. Attorneys are leading a new coordinated federal effort to deepen our partnerships with communities on a host of issues. Because we don’t just want to keep our young people from committing acts of violence, we want them to help build our country.
But will the guy from the government who comes around to Dearborn most often be from HHS or from DHS?
Comments