In early 1946, George Kennan, a US diplomat, sent a telegraphic message from Moscow to Foggy Bottom. In the halls of academia, his insightful remarks became known as "The Long Telegram" and now that the Soviet Union is no more, "The Long Telegram" is relegated to being a part of the lesson plan on the history of the Soviet Union. I would argue that Kennan's observations should not be resigned to a college history course. Kennan set forth five conclusions on how to deal with the problem of communism and the Soviet Union. If you substitute the term Muslims for the term communists, the insightfulness of his advice is rock solid.

Precedent is largely understood in the venue of legal actions, but it is also used a primary discipline in diplomacy. Many people like to think of the US as a peaceable nation, wishing no harm on other nations and seeking free trade where it can be found, but our history shows a more violent diplomatic policy. Consider the facts...since 1798 until 1993, the US used military force to impose its will on other countries or groups of antagonists 234 times...only 5 of these were declared wars. For those congressmen suing the President to stop impending hostilities with Iraq on the grounds that Congress must first declare war, they need to read "Instances of Use of United States Forces Abroad, 1798 - 1993" by Ellen C. Collier, Specialist in U.S. Foreign Policy, Foreign Affairs and National Defense Division,Washington DC, written on October 7, 1993. It could save them some money and make them appear smarter than they are. The bottom line is that the US policy toward entities that attacked US interests was not one of diplomatic protest (unless you consider getting your ass kicked by US Marines to be a diplomatic protest) but one of vengeance and retribution. The prevailing thought was that an overwhelming military response to such acts would make the perpetrators stop such behavior in their future considerations when dealing with US interests or simply eliminate the threat altogether.

For the most part this policy worked quite well and its use was continued into the 1900's almost without change. In the 93 years of the 1900's chronicled by Ms. Collier in her report, US military forces were engaged in hostile events every year except for a 6 year stretch from 1934 to 1940. One could argue that the lack of a robust US policy of military diplomacy in the years immediately prior to WWII led to the conclusion by our enemies that we were weak and without resolve or resources to protect our own interests or those of our allies...but that is another column.

In Kennan's remarks, if you substitute the term Muslims for the term communists, Soviets, or Russians, his advice is as relevant today as it was in 1946 in dealing with the Soviet Union. Here is why we should look at Kennan's words with a fresh vision...his first concluding recommendation said this:


"Our first step must be to apprehend, and recognize for what it is, the nature of the movement with which we are dealing. We must study it with the same courage, detachment, objectivity, and the same determination not to be emotionally provoked or unseated by it, with which a doctor studies unruly and unreasonable individuals."

His second concluding recommendation was too long to quote here in full length, but these extracted comments cut to the heart of his advice:


"We must see that our public is educated to realities of Russian situation. I cannot overemphasize the importance of this. Press cannot do this alone. It must be done mainly by government, which is necessarily more experienced and better informed on practical problems involved. In this we need not be deterred by ugliness of the picture. I am convinced that there would be far less hysterical anti-Sovietism in our country today if the realities of this situation were better understood by our people. There is nothing as dangerous or as terrifying as the unknown."

Again, substitute Muslims for the terms Russian and Sovietism in this quote and the following quotes and you will find advice that is sound and practical for the fight against terrorism.

Kennan's third comment starts with this:


"Much depends on health and vigor of our own society. World communism is like malignant parasite which feeds only on diseased tissue." and makes this important point a little further into it:


"...we cannot abandon fatalism and indifference in face of deficiencies of our own society..."

I read this and thought to myself, at what point do we stop trying to prevent ALL terrorism at the expense of our way of life? One of the things we cherish as Americans is the freedom to do what we want without having to explain ourselves to the nearest antiterrorist agent who has orders to suspect everyone as terrorists including grandmothers in wheelchairs, aging veterans, recipients of the Medal of Honor, and others who are very obviously NO THREAT to themselves or the others around them. I'll give you a clue about the identity of the terrorists...they are men of Arab descent between the ages of 18-34. Unfortunately, their genes and age make all men of Arab descent between the ages of 18-34 a suspect as well as a target of suspicion.

In his fourth and fifth recommendations, Kennan makes the following concluding recommendations:

"We must formulate and put forward for other nations a much more positive and constructive picture of the sort of world we would like to see..."

"Finally, we must have courage and self-confidence to cling to our own methods and conceptions of human society. After all, the greatest danger that can befall us in coping with this problem of Soviet communism is that we shall allow ourselves to become like those with whom we are coping."

We must not allow ourselves to become like our enemies. Our freedom is what we are fighting to defend...our way of life is the prize we seek to keep...our peace of mind must not be lost to the fear of terrorist violence.

Rip Kirby

rk_roe20702.html