Two radically different views

So which is right: are the tensions between the United States and the Muslim world/Middle East due primarily to U.S. foreign policy, or to pressures from the region, especially Muslim extremism?

Iranian-born journalist Amir Taheri provides an excellent overview of what happened in the Middle East during the Bush years. He argues that the concept of democracy has gained a foothold there, although it has a long way to go. However, many serious problems remain throughout the region; he cites Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Yemen and North Africa as places where Islamist power is growing.

A bipartisan report by the Search for Common Ground and the Consensus Building Institute now circulating in Washington makes quite a different argument: They assign primary blame to Bush policies, rather than Muslim religious or cultural beliefs, and argue that, if the policies change, perceptions will change. The group included former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, among others.

To save you from unbearable tension as you try to devine my opinion, let me quote a passage from Taheri's article:

"...as in the cold war between Western liberal democracy and Soviet totalitarianism, the fight in the Middle East is ultimately an ideological one...No amount of material aid and commercial cooperation can, on its own, defeat that ideology, although both economic aid and trade can be powerful tools in the struggle. It is on the political field of battle that Islamism, like its predecessor Soviet Communism, must eventually experience its strategic defeat."

Taheri argues that, to succeed, America will have to win the battle at home first. "For nothing could so cripple the successful prosecution of the struggle abroad as continued dissention at home..."

I wish I were more optimistic about that outcome.