Quantum Note
February 25, 2005
The Third Crusade
On October 2, 1187, the day of ascension of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to the heavens (Mir`aj), a Kurd by the name of Salahuddin was waiting outside the walls of Jerusalem. Two days ago, the city had capitulated to his army but he wanted to enter the city on the anniversary of the Prophet’s ascension which began from the Dome of the Rock in the center of the city.
Twenty-seven days later, Pope Greogry VIII issued the Bull Audita Tremendi, calling for the Third Crusade. Frederick I Barbarossa of Germany, Philip II Augustus of France, and Richard I the Lion heart of England responded immediately. In addition to the religious zeal, Gregory was motivated to issue the Bull because the squabbling between France and England was sapping the strength of the European kingdoms and he wanted to provide them a common cause to divert their warring energies. Eight centuries later, George W Bush arrived in a European city to call for a united stand against Iran—his third crusade after Afghanistan and Iraq—so that the simmering discontent between the United States and Europe could be pushed under the rug.
When he launched his first crusade against Afghanistan, there was a huge wave of sympathy behind him. He was utterly alone in his second crusade, but through deceitful language, he has been trying to rewrite history: “Some Europeans joined the fight to liberate Iraq, while others did not,” he said in Brussels, “but all nations now have an interest in the success of a free and democratic Iraq, which will fight terror, which will be a beacon of freedom and which will be a source of true stability in the region.”
The only problem with this sophistry is that it is too late in the day; millions of people around the world already know that when Bush says freedom, he means occupation; when he says liberation, he means liberation from life through carpet bombing; when he says democracy, he means a Bushy democracy that grows in the green zones of the occupied cities where his soldiers erect barbed wire around the fortified fields and where innocent civilians are shot dead simply because they did not step aside when his soldiers decided to roam the streets.
Mustering support for his third crusade is, however, an order of totally different proportions: this time the crusade is not against a terrorized population of a cruel dictator, but against a country where martyrdom is as common as spring flowers. He knows he cannot afford to attack Iran on his own and therefore, he is in Europe to prepare ground for his third crusade: “In Iran, the free world shares a common goal for the sake of peace,” he declared, “the Iranian regime must end support for terrorism and must not develop nuclear weapons.”
What warped logic! While the United States and Russia have launched a new program of research to develop so-called smarter nuclear weapons, and when the death of more than 100,000 Iraqis killed by American forces is still being mourned by their relatives, the commander-in-chief of that ruthless army is blaming another state of supporting terrorism. If he really wishes to see terror, he should look at the face of the eight-year-old Hussein who witness his parents being shot dead by his soldier in their own home in Falluja. If he really wishes to know what it means to support terrorism, he should look at the flow of weapons and money into Iraq where hired men are sitting in the fortified zone, issuing commands to bombard entire towns and villages.
Bush demanded reforms in Iran: “We also look to Iran to finally deliver on promised reform. The time has arrived for the Iranian regime to listen to the Iranian people and respect their rights and join in the movement toward liberty that is taking place all around them.” One wonders if he simply forgot that it is his regime that needed to be reformed because millions of people marched in all major cities of the world to stop him from invading Iraq, but he did not listen. He also demanded an end to Syria’s “occupation” of Lebanon, where a meager 15,000 Syrian soldiers are present, conveniently forgetting the one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers who now occupy Iraq as if it was their birthright to desecrate that land.
The most important question now is whether France and Germany would join England in forming an alliance for Bush’s third crusade as Henry II Plantagenet of England, Frederick I Barbarossa of Germany, and Philip II of France had done in 1188. Then they had forgotten their mutual differences and decided to take up the Cross and participate in a military expedition against Salahuddin.
Of course, there is no Salahuddin today anywhere in the Muslim world, but even without him, this will not be an easy march to Tehran. Even if these nations were to join together, they will not be able to occupy a land of seventy million Iranians ready to sacrifice everything. But occupation of Iran may not be the real goal of this crusade; Bush may only be planning for massive destruction through carpet bombing. This will not cost him any dead soldiers, but will certainly reduce those beautiful cities of Iran to rubble. Such ruthlessness cannot be ruled out; the road to Baghdad is, after all, still littered with the dead bodies of men who were bombed out of existence when they had already surrendered.