In the news...Five British soldiers are killed by a rogue policeman in Helmand...An army psychiatrist kills 13 at Fort Hood military base in Texas.
On November 4, 2009 reports that five British soldiers were killed by an Afghan policeman at a military post in Helmand emerged, but did not hit the headlines. The next day, terror was brought a step closer to home when a major in the US Army shot 13 people dead at the Fort Hood military base in Texas. The first incident was treated by the media as yet another side-effect of war, while the second sparked a debate over national security, military strategy and, of course, religion. However, no one seemed to have tied the two events together and consider the underlying suggestion that we are not only fighting a distant threat, but an enemy from within.
Had these two shootings taken place at the same time, their co-ordination may have suggested a terrorist attack. But it appears safe to state that we are dealing with two isolated incidents of solitary madness. The British Army has classified the shooter as a ‘rogue’ policeman with ties to - it’s a shocker - the Taliban, while the press chooses phrases like ‘murderous rampage’ to designate the singular nature of brutality at Fort Hood. However, it is precisely the timing that makes the two shootings significant. Happening consecutively, they draw attention to the fact that the Allied effort in Iraq and now Afghanistan is beginning to lose sense for those who have enlisted to fight for it.
Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an American Muslim born in Virginia, 39 year-old army psychiatrist. That description sounds like a bad joke. Had it not been for the horror of the pointless deaths, the headlines would no doubt be screaming with the likes of ‘Shrink Goes Postal’. The fact that the shooter was Muslim only adds fuel to the already-hot fire of paranoia and distrust - which is precisely what the American government is desperately trying to avoid. While President Obama praises the unity of purpose in the US Army and the whole nation, the mainstream press is hardlining the lone-shooter scenario. Unlikely as it is, America is still cautious about a Hollywood-remake of Kristallnacht, so everyone seems to be tiptoeing on broken glass.
The situation is beginning to look a little like a game of truth or dare, where the authorities can’t decide what would be worse for America’s wrecked nervous system - the fact that a home-grown jihadist was allowed to slip through to the heart of the US security like an unnoticed blood clot or that the stress of its aggressive foreign policy is ricocheting in its own back yard. Of course, it was only a matter of time until lines like ‘90% screwball with 10% jihadi flavour’ were going to surface, and not only from the far right. While the Army and the FBI are being very cautious in drawing premature conclusions, links to radical Islamists are being investigated. Not to consider a religious aspect would be utter folly. As would be hedging all your bets on it. This is a fine line through the psyche of an American Muslim officer - a cross-section that needs to be thoroughly understood, if we are to learn anything from this experience.
The US Army finds itself in a precarious situation when it comes to enlisting Muslims in the current climate. It is safe to assume that living under the shadow of George W.’s ‘crusade’ is not easy for any American Muslim. The New York Times carried an interesting piece on the problems faced by Muslim soldiers in the army, emphasising their ‘civil war’ state of mind. The US Army cannot afford not to enlist Muslims, as that would not only violate what America stands for, but create an army of Christian America. But at the same time, arming people against whose systems of belief a war is being waged is a clear risk. It is a choice between a country and an army you can trust, and the US government has its money on the state. Fort Hood was a necessary sacrifice for national unity. To date, out of 1.4 million active servicemen, about 3,500 official claim to be Muslim (unofficial estimates are around 20,000). Admittedly, you could bet on those odds.
The shootings come at an uncertain time of deliberation. Hamid Karzai had just won a shady election in Afghanistan and is now touring Europe to be lectured on the extent of his corruption. The Taliban is shelling Kabul, and the NATO generals cannot agree on a strategy. President Obama is under stress at home to formulate a clear Afghanistan policy - so that the people would know exactly what their young coutry-men and women are dying for, as opposed to just dying. The British government is suggesting, in half tones just now, talks with the Taliban - which can only mean one thing - and it is not victory.
Afghanistan is a place where empires go to die. First the British, then the Soviet, now American. Defying historical - but some might agree not common - sense, the Allied Forces have pried open Pandora’s Box and are fighting the consequences. But it was one thing when the enemy was a ‘haaji’ or a ‘raghead’. It becomes a whole different story when someone you trust, someone you train, someone you give a gun to fight for your cause turns around and machine-guns you down. It upturns the scales of justice, grief and blame - and not in our favour.
In the wake of the Fort Hood massacre, the US Army is reopening the grievances-box and psychiatric help for veterans is high on the agenda. Of course, the incident places a question mark over the condition of mental health specialists themselves. According to The New York Times, the Army is trying new methods for stress-management, including breathing techniques. So we should all take a deep breath and remember that as long as there is a war for hearts and minds going on, there will always be some we cannot convince. And then ask ourselves whether we should be trying to at all.
