The Emperor of Ice Cream: Bush’s Insane Doctrine

Moses’ Pharaoh, Herod-the-tyrant, Nero, Abraha, and the Mongols – all embarked on this gruesome policy which eventually brought ruin and destruction upon its instigators and the people who followed them.

Pharaoh and Herod are famous example; their pre-emptive campaigns were diabolically symmetrical; both wanted to kill blessed infants, baby Moses and baby Jesus respectively, before they grew up to threaten their authority. But what of the Mongols and their strategy of pre-emption? Genghis Khan, their most powerful emperor, believed he was the "Universal Ruler," and that he had been given the dominion of the whole world. And so he embarked on his brutal pre-emptive tactic. His army of Tartars were so bloody, so ferocious, so remorseless, that their Russians victims called them invaders from Tartarus, the deepest pit of Hell. But the ultimate enemy of the Mongols was themselves. As they accumulated wealth, they became resented by the people as an elite, privileged class exempt from taxation. It took several natural disasters and a peasant rebellion to rid the world of their heinous empire.

We all know of Nero’s madness – of his hysterical laughter as he watched Rome burn. But Nero’s madness was not without rhyme and reason. There was system to his alleged insanity – a system that is chillingly reminiscent of Bush’s doctrine of pre-emption. When a fire broke out in Rome in July of 64 AD. destroying much of the city, Nero turned the wrath of the population against the Christians, who made excellent scapegoats since the population already despised their holier than-thou attitude.
Tacitus writes in his Annales that when crowds of Christians were placed on trial, they were convicted not so much for arson as because of their "hatred of the human race." Some were put to death; others were imprisoned, tortured, set on fire, crucified or torn to death by dogs. In the midst of all this carnage, Nero mingled with his people in the dress of a charioteer or drove about in his chariot. As Tacitus explains, the Christians were being destroyed "not for the public good but to gratify the cruelty of an individual." In other words, Nero ingeniously capitalized on the July 64 attack to persecute and attack minorities and people of different religions and ethnic backgrounds – all in the name of national security.

Today, it is not the Christian population but Iraq, and Muslims and Arabs who are being punished and blamed for the burning of the World Trade Center. Today, it is not Christian "hatred of the human race," but Muslim "jealousy" and "hatred" of Western freedom and Western way of life that is being offered as a pretext for the trial and conviction of innocent human beings. This witch-hunt is perpetrated not only by the Bush administration but even by ordinary civilians, by the so-called relatives of the victims of Sept. 11. In the trial in Germany of 28-year-old Mounir El-Motassadeq, the Moroccan student accused of helping terrorist pilots set up the attack, American relatives of the victims offered tearful testimony and made emotional pleas for a guilty verdict against the student even though he has claimed he knew nothing of the plot and had nothing to do with the attack. They insisted that El-Motassadeq was guilty by association. A widow of a New York firefighter lashed out at what she called his "aggressive and unapologetic" defense of his actions. In typical Bushian rhetoric, she insisted that he had chosen to "associate himself with the forces of evil" and demanded he receive "life imprisonment." Other relatives drew parallels to Nazi war crimes trials, saying that those involved in perpetuating the Holocaust used these same arguments to claim innocence. Do the American expect all Arabs, no matter how wrongfully accused, to bend over backwards and accept punishment without "aggressively" defending themselves? The basic problem is that Bush’s Nero-like bellicose and crude rhetoric has become a means for Americans to vent their anger and spite, to find a so-called sense of closure, and above all to gain millions of dollars in law suits against alleged associates no matter how fabricated the case against them is or how flimsy the evidence offered by US intelligent sources.

To go back to our list of pre-emptive tyrants, let us take an example less familiar to the Western world – the case of Abraha, the Christian viceroy of Yemen.
In 570 AD., a year aptly called the "year of the elephant" by medieval Arab historians, the Abyssinian Abraha, launched a pre-emptive campaign against Makkah, hoping to divert the annual Arabian pilgrimage from the Kaaba, the ancient shrine built by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ishmael, to the new church he had just erected at Sanaa.
Abraha hoped to gain not only religiously but financially as well; Makkah was the economic center of the ancient trade route, and by destroying its sacred shrine, he hoped to shift this lucrative enterprise from Makkah to Yemen. And so this religious fanatic and overly-ambitious ruler set out at the head of a large army equipped with the latest wonder-weapons of the times – a 13-strong army of elephants led by Mahmoud, the biggest and meanest elephant in all of Arabia!

The story of Abraha’s awesome pre-emptive attack is described in the Qur’an and fully documented by Arab historians. To cut a long saga short, like something straight out of Hitchckock or Spielberg, Abraha’s army was completely destroyed by successive flocks of killer birds that came from the direction of the sea and pelted the men with "molten" rocks until they were all "eaten to the stubble." It is believed that the multitude of pigeons circling the Kaaba to this day are descendants of those mysterious flying creatures from the sea that saved the people of Makkah who in stoic resignation had placed their fate in the hands of the Almighty God and prayed for deliverance.

Historians inclined toward a more naturalistic explanation say that what decimated the army was a killer virus, an air raid of smallpox-laden rocks that literally dissolved the flesh of Abraha’s holy warriors, finger-by-finger and limb-by-limb. By the time Abraha had reached Yemen, he looked like "a plucked chicken," and eventually his heart just "burst from his breast." Had it not been the 6th century BC, Abraha would have surely screamed biological WMD and called in UN inspectors to disarm Makkah. But God works in mysterious ways and He is certainly capable of launching biological warfare on those who oppress and terrorize the faithful.

Contrary to Bush’s theology-ridden emotional appeal in his February State of the Union address, God’s gift to humanity is not "freedom," but security and peace. Bush’s arrogance, his flaunting of power and his threat to unleash the mighty weapons of America is un-godly, almost sacrilegious, a pagan religion by any standards. Must we remind him that God alone is capable of guarding us from hunger and protecting us from fear. In all scriptures, it is not only the peacemakers who are blessed but also the "poor in spirit," "the meek," "the merciful, and "the pure in heart." They are the salt of the earth, the light of the world (Mathew 5: 13-15).

As to the elephants, we know that just before the onslaught of birds, their leader Mahmoud had absolutely refused to budge in the direction of Makkah. The poor creature was beaten and pelted and tortured, and yet he remained steadfast, ready to move in all directions except toward the Holy Kaaba. These words were said to have been whispered in Mahmoud’s ears by Nafil ibn Habeeb, an Arab Bedouin abducted by Abraha’s men and forced to act as a guide:
"Stop Mahmoud! Return from whence you came. For you are in God’s holy land."

The moral of this pre-emption story is that the greatness of a nation is not measured by its superior military might, but by the wisdom of its leaders and the righteousness of its people. The moral of the tale is that arrogance, greed and coveting the lands and resources of others can lead to great ruin and the scourge of God. As one Russian protester, holding a photograph of Bush in last weekend’s global demonstrations, so aptly phrased it: "Butcher: Get out of other people’s land." The moral of the tale is that God alone has the power to grant victory or defeat, glory or humiliation. All goodness is in his hands and He alone is capable of all things.

History has come full circle, and the Holy land of Makkah is again being threatened by a brutal army of vindictive men equipped with a modern-day army of elephants. Whether we like it or not, Iraq is the gateway to the most sacred cities of Islam, Makkah, Madinah and Jerusalem. As one US administrative official puts it: "The road to the entire Middle East goes through Baghdad." Should Iraq fall in the hands of white supremacists, Christian extremists and radical Zionists, that will threaten the very security of our holy sites. Already we are told that Israeli Prime Minister Sharon has a list of potential targets in Iraq, and is simply dying to enter the bombing campaign. Even if he doesn’t, he is gearing up to claim the Al-Aqsa Mosque and cleanse Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza once the US attack on Iraq is under way, knowing full well that he will be financed and defended by the Bush administration.

Yes, the pending pre-emptive attack against Iraq and the US military buildup in the Gulf are ominous signs for the inhabitants of this holy region. There’s a mad raging elephant in our living room, and we cannot just ignore it or wish it away. The argument that we must bomb and nuke Iraq to get rid of one brutal tyrant just doesn’t hold. Do we remove the whole brain to get rid of a suspicious tumor? Do we bomb our family home to get rid of an intruder? Do we gas Chicago because it is the center of crime in the world? The forces of evil, Bush, Blair and Sharon, definitely have a more sinister agenda and one must have the brains of a gnat not to realize what that is.

There’s no mistake about it, the thirst for the oil-fields of Mosul and Kirkuk, and for the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates and for the easy money of the Middle East, is at the top of Bush’s agenda. For those who need more graphic evidence, Larry Lindsey, Bush’s former top economic advisor states it quite bluntly: "When there is regime change in Iraq, you could add three million to five million barrels (per day) of production to world supply. The successful prosecution of the war would be good for the economy." According to the BBC correspondent in Iraq, Raggi Omar, a full tank, 170 liters of oil, costs just $3 at an Iraqi gas station. At the world market, a barrel of oil, 159 liters, now costs $34. In more mundane terms, a full tank in Iraq costs less than a big scoop of Baskin Robbins ice cream, a rich Jamaica mocha flavor at that. Just think, wouldn’t that definitely whet the appetite of the emperor of ice cream?

Afnan Hussein Fatani is Professor of Stylistics