What Maj. Nidal Hasan did to his fellow soldiers was a horrible thing. And I join the president in his wish that the killer meets with justice “in this world and the next.” The suspect’s state of mind and motives are not yet clear. However, it’s tough for any politician to resist emotional sentiments that arise in the aftermath of such incidents, especially in the post-9/11 world. By not choosing the cheap and irresponsible option -- that is, pointing the finger -- Obama has demonstrated he can be a wise and calm leader during heated times.I must also give huge credit to Gen. George Casey, the US army chief of staff. Consistent with his civilian commander-in-chief’s line, Gen. Casey said the following during an interview with NBC last Sunday: “Our diversity, not only in our army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” Armies basically exist and fight to defend the values and lifestyle of a nation. What’s the point of having an army, then, if a prominent American value such as diversity were to be undermined by excluding Muslims from the government and society?
Gen. Casey’s remarks came when he was asked about concerns regarding a possible backlash against Muslim soldiers in the US military. He confirmed those concerns are “real.” Especially when one sees some extremist and racist views emanating from certain groups in the US, you better understand why. Just check what the American Family Association (AFA), retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, New York University (NYU) Professor Tunku Varadarajan, television evangelist Pat Robertson and others have said. On the other hand, it’s heartening that those views constitute only a minority. And that keeps me still optimistic about the future of this nation.
While most mainstream political and community leaders refrained from jumping to conclusions, there were also those who could not resist the temptation. Senator Joe Lieberman, who heads the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, said initial evidence suggested that the suspect was a “self-radicalized, home-grown” terrorist who had turned to “Islamic extremism” while under personal stress. Paradoxically, he also said it’s “too early” to make any definitive conclusions, as if he wasn’t the one who was just speculating. Senator John McCain followed him, calling the incident an “act of terror,” as if he is part of the investigation. Why the rush, gentlemen, don’t you have any patience with due process?
When asked whether he thinks having Muslims in the army puts them in a very difficult position of fighting a war against Muslims in Afghanistan or Iraq, Gen. Casey replied, “I think that’s something that they have to look at on an individual basis.” Again, that’s the right approach. Even if eventually religiosity turns out to be a factor in Nidal’s actions, that’s his individual and obviously distorted interpretation. It does not bind Islam and other Muslims, just as one cannot blame all Christians and Christianity as a religion because some individuals are bombing abortion clinics in their name.
That said, I must also note when somebody commits a crime, it also means there has been a failure in control mechanisms. Some people are trying to put the blame on such institutions as the military or the FBI, as if there were security lapses that led to this incident. They question the effectiveness of early detection mechanisms designed to identify people who might be inclined to violence and terrorism. I would argue that societal gaps are worth more attention than security gaps because had we not so many societal gaps in the first place, most security problems would not arise at all.
Here is what I mean by that. Maj. Hasan did not go nuts, nor did he become an alleged terrorist in a second. Society failed to prevent or at least detect him earlier. That certainly includes the Muslim community as well. I don’t know if his e-mail correspondence with the former radical imam of the Dar al-Hijrah Mosque played a factor. What I do know is that his religious mentors, mosque and family should have done a better job of detecting and helping with his problems. And I’m sure a middle ground could have been found if Hasan really had an ongoing conflict between his religious/ideological and national allegiances.
Instead of adopting the easy and lazy task of pointing out his religion or ethnic background and so forth, Hasan should be treated as a troubled individual who is a product of a society (and a world) with a weakened immune system. Evidently, wars are not good for the health of the societal immune system. And sticking to admirable values such as diversity, religious understanding and tolerance has a vitamin effect. Maybe one needs to look from this perspective for a more thorough preventive diagnosis and cure for this kind of violence.
