Article content continued

This reluctance stems partly from fear that the tiger they are riding might turn on them if they try to dismount. But it also stems from the very radical Wahhabi ideology that has driven the House of Saud intellectually and politically since the late 18th-century alliance between preacher Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and sheikh Muhammad bin Saud.

The statement announcing the coalition declared that Islam forbids “corruption and destruction in the world” and called terrorism “a serious violation of human dignity and rights, especially the right to life and the right to security.” At a news conference, Saudi Deputy Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohammed bin Salman said, “Currently, every Muslim country is fighting terrorism individually … so co-ordinating efforts is very important.” The new alliance would tackle “any terrorist organization that appears in front of us.” But these words almost certainly do not mean what they seem.

Typically, the Obama administration is spinning the initiative as a welcome response to its call for Arab nations to do more to combat radicalism and terrorism. Supposedly the coalition will take the place of the Syrian “moderate rebels” who have so signally failed to materialize during the conflict. Britain has offered air support, information and command-and-control assistance for the troops it will supposedly deploy.

We remain unconvinced. Various renditions of “freedom fighters” in the Muslim world have disappointed the West again and again, from Taliban opposition to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, to sectarian squabblers in Iraq, and the Muslim Brotherhood that took power in Egypt’s version of the “Arab Spring.” None has shared western goals or capacity for effective action. The ultimate dream of the Saudis would be to rid the Middle East of all non-Muslims, which to them includes Shi’ites as well as Jews and Christians. In 2004, when a former Archbishop of Canterbury complained to the Saudi ambassador to the UK that it was against the law to build a church in Saudi Arabia, and was told Christians should embrace Islam and pray in mosques. In the Middle East, our enemies’ enemies are generally not our friends.

[np_storybar title=”Read & Debate” link=””] Find Full Comment on Facebook[/np_storybar]

In considering the new Muslim army, consider whether it would be appropriate to assemble a similarly armed Christian coalition. That is precisely what ISIL, Al-Qaeda and other such groups claim is already happening, with their endless diatribes and threats against “Crusaders.” But if a Christian army is shocking, sectarian, divisive and so forth, why is not a Wahhabi-inspired Muslim one regarded with at least equal suspicion and dismay?

National Post