Until a few years ago Osama Bin Laden was regarded as the biggest threat to western civilization. Now of course the ISIS is bigger and stronger than the Al Qaeda.
But from a broad perspective the situation has not changed for the West. Yes, the ISIS is capable of civil war (in Syria) while the Al Qaeda was only limited to terror strikes. But from the point of view of military might the ISIS is no match for the armed forces of the western countries.
We cannot imagine the ISIS defeating the West in a war between nations. The West on the other hand can wipe out the entire Syrian state if it decides at any time to use the nuclear option. Even in conventional warfare the ISIS has no chance of winning. Outside Syria ISIS only has the same option as that of the Al Qaeda i.e resorting to terror strikes.
This being the case the West has to lose the clash between civilizations. ISIS cannot win it through its own resources.
So what would I do if I was the commander of ISIS. There are two interconnected principles that I would employ. The first is taught in the eastern martial arts whereas the second is used in the game of Chess.
Principle 1 – I would try to use the strength of the western countries against themselves.
Principle 2 – This principle says that the threat is stronger than the execution. This strategy is such that when you are in a position to attack the enemy you do not execute the threat. You keep the sword dangling over the head of the enemy. The enemy will try to defend itself from the threat and in doing so it will weaken its position much more than would have been the case had the threat been executed. This is a strategy which is attributed to the Chess Grandmaster Aaron Nimzovitch.
Using these principles I would try to get the western countries to act against their own interests. This is possible if:-
- The western countries use their military might unwisely against civilians in Syria and elsewhere.
- The western countries match fanaticism with fanaticism and lose their broad, inclusive, rational and scientific temper that has driven progress in their civilization for the past centuries starting with the Renaissance.
The Al Qaeda or ISIS or anybody else can only act as an irritant. Assuming they do not get hold of weapons of mass destruction they can only kill a limited number of people. If the West uses its military might unwisely in response to these irritants it will help ISIS win the propaganda war against the West and they will attract more recruits.
The second mistake – should the West make it – will be much more serious. Should the West oppose the fanaticism of ISIS with fanaticism they will end up destroying its own rational and scientific temper which is necessary not just for economic progress but also for the survival of the human race.
The threat of global warming and climate change looms large and the only way it can be countered is by coming up with scientific inventions which will meet mankind’s energy and other needs in a renewable manner. And the continuous growth of science depends upon the West protecting and preserving its rich intellectual rational and scientific traditions.
Thanks for reading. If you would like me to add you to my list of free subscribers send me a message through the Contact form (Link is at the bottom). We can continue this discussion and I will try to answer whatever questions you may have.
Find this handy. Buy me a coffee