Home › Features › Essays › What Green Peril?

What Green Peril?

Leon T. Hadar
Spring 1993
Summary: 

With the end of the Cold War many at home and abroad are urging the United States to prepare for a new long struggle against radical Islam. But Islam is neither a threat to the United States nor a unified political phenomenon. Iran, the supposed center of Islamic fundamentalism, has pursued a foreign policy dominated by geopolitics, not religion. In the rest of the Middle East, Islam has become the language of political opposition to a thoroughly corrupt status quo. By blindly supporting autocratic Arab regimes against these popular movements, the United States will turn the threat of Islamic fundamentalism into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Login or Register to leave a comment.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.

Fanning the Fear of Islam

From home and abroad voices have begun to counsel the Clinton administration that with communism's death, America must prepare for a new global threat--radical Islam. This specter is symbolized by the Middle Eastern Muslim fundamentalist, a Khomeini-like creature armed with a radical ideology and nuclear weapons, intent on launching a jihad against Western civilization.

In the search for new doctrines for a new world, this image of a worldwide threat from militant Islam could filter deep into the policymaking processes of the new administration. In the way that the perception of danger from Soviet communism helped to define U.S. foreign policy for more than four decades, the fear of Islam could embroil Washington in a second Cold War.

This policy, however, would rest on utterly fallacious assumptions: Islam is neither unified nor a threat to the United States. Were America to let these phobias drive its foreign policy it would be forced into long and costly battles with various, unrelated regional phenomena. In the Middle East, the principal battleground of this struggle, it would place America in the position of maintaining a corrupt, reactionary and unstable status quo. In short, such a policy would run against the long-term interests of the peoples of America and the Middle East.

Conjuring up a New Menace

Like the Red Menace of the Cold War era, the Green Peril--green being the color of Islam--is described as a cancer spreading around the globe, undermining the legitimacy of Western values and threatening the national security of the United States. Tehran is the center of this ideological subversion, the world's new Comintern. The goal of the Iranian-led global intifada is said to be support for anti-Western regimes stretching from North Africa across the Near East and the Persian Gulf to Central Asia. Tehran's aim is to control the oil-rich gulf, destroy Israel and threaten areas on the periphery of a new "arc of crisis"--the Horn of Africa, southern Europe, the Balkans and the Indian subcontinent.

This is a premium article

You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.

Buy PDF

Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.

Related

Essay, Spring 1991
Toward the Post-Cold War World
John Lewis Gaddis

The aftermath of the events of 1989 may have invalidated the simple division of the world, into democratic and totalitarian camps, which formed the basis of the Truman doctrine, "but another form of competition has been emerging that could be just as stark and just as pervasive... it is the contest between forces of integration and fragmentation". Forces for integration, or the breaking-down of barriers between nations which conduces to peace, include the communications revolution, growing economic inter-dependence and collective security. Forces of fragmentation, which conduce to war, include nationalism, certain types of religion, and socio-economic inequalities. Yet it is not clear that integrationist forces are generally benign, or fragmentationist forces generally malign, to US national interests, which has historically rested on the balancing of fragmented power. This should indeed remain the key principle of US and allied foreign policy, but henceforward the balance to be kept is not between entities, but between competing processes.

Read
Essay, Spring 1993
The Challenge of Radical Islam
Judith Miller

Any individual or government concerned with pluralism, democracy and human rights must not be complacent about the rise of militant Islamic groups. Islam is incompatible with these values--as shown by the continued oppression of women and minorities in Muslim societies. Support for democratic elections in the Middle East is thus contradictory, because radical Islamic fundamentalists, who are most likely to come to power, have no commitment to democracy. Trying to distinguish between good and bad Islamic groups may be convenient for U.S. policymakers, but it is impossible to determine which ones will keep their promises of democracy and human rights. In practice, few do.

Read
Essay, Spring 1993
Secrets of Castro's Staying Power
Jorge Domínguez

Since 1989 communist regimes worldwide have toppled like dominoes. Yet Fidel Castro's homegrown revolution clings tenaciously. How has Cuban communism managed to survive despite the withdrawal of the Soviet subsidy? Economic hardship has hit Cuba's already weak opposition particularly hard. Stubborn U.S. policies blocking tourism and commercial communications only censor outside information to the island. And the new Cuban Democracy Act tightening the U.S. economic embargo gives credence to the regime's call for sacrifices in the face of a foreign threat. With enemies like these, Castro may not need friends.

Read
Cover image

In the Magazine

March/April 2010, 2, 89
Essay
After Iran Gets the Bomb
James M. Lindsay and Ray Takeyh

Despite international pressure, Iran appears to be continuing its march toward getting a nuclear bomb. But Washington can contain and mitigate the consequences of Tehran's nuclear defiance, keeping an abhorrent outcome from becoming a catastrophic one.
Read