An Arab Perspective on Political Islam

The Ongoing Conflict Between Political Islam and the West
By Magdi Khalil

While there is no issue with Islam as a religious belief, political Islam – as much as any political body – was bound to make mistakes. The Muslim Caliphate was the manifestation of that concept in past ages; and it can be identified nowadays in the upsurge of “Global Islamism”.

The offensive cartoon that triggered a violent outburst in the Muslim World, and particularly in the Arab part of that world, raises the question about the true nature of the current happenings: are we dealing with a contrived cultural confrontation or with a dispute that is gradually shaping into another round of the ongoing conflict between the West and Islam?

I personally lean towards the second option, and there are precedents in history to support that opinion. Political Islam and the West are at extreme odds, waves of mutual hostility and animosity can be tracked throughout history, and, we may indeed be witnessing the fifth round in that long, historical conflict.

The First Round: initiated by political Islam via the first Islamic invasions, or what is known in Islam as the “Islamic conquests”. The early Islamic conquests reached the West, threatened Europe and left an obvious mark on Al-Andalus.

The Second Round: Europe set off this round with the crusades; those were launched under religious banners in the same fashion as the first Islamic round, and left the Muslims of the East with extremely bitter memories.

The Third Round: initiated by political Islam through the Ottoman Caliphate that was accompanied by a huge, widespread violent wave, posing a menace to the survival of Europe, and leaving a clear impact spanning from Asia Minor to the Balkans.

The Fourth Round: Europe initiated this one with the European colonization of most of the Muslim World – some countries remained under occupation until the sixties of last century.

Clearly, the two parties have exchanged “blows” throughout history, each side initiating an equal number of rounds, but with different outcomes. Political Islam left behind Muslim entities in the former USSR and in some European states, by forcing the indigenous populations to convert to Islam. The West was – and still is – engaged in helping the Jews realize their historical dream to resurrect their ancient kingdom in the land of Palestine.

It is worth mentioning that there is a difference between Islam as a religious practice, i.e. spiritual rituals, worship, and faith in God and the five pillars – and political Islam, where Islam serves as an ideology with a vision to create a viable political Muslim entity. The Muslim Caliphate was the manifestation of that concept in past ages, and it can be identified nowadays in the upsurge of the concept of “Global Islamism”. The Islamization of all aspects of life is at the heart of this comprehensive concept, and terrorism – the military side of this concept - serves as a reinforcing brutal arm. In other words, in reference to the common argument that Islam is both din wa dawla (religion and state), we need to differentiate between the two aspects; the issue has nothing to do with Islam as a religious belief, and the right of belief is a granted personal right. However the notion of Islam as “a state” addresses the political aspect, and, political Islam – as much as any political body – is bound to make mistakes.

The exclusive religious nature of Islam only lasted for a few years after its emergence; before long, Islam had fused religion and politics, giving birth to what is known as political Islam—a concept that is still in effect in our times. Political Islam, by definition (whether scientific or functional) is an old phenomenon, as ancient as Islam itself, only the labelsl have changed throughout history.

It is also worth noting that from a western perspective, the conflict with political Islam is basically of a political nature, even though it has taken on a religious angle in one particular round. On the other hand, from an Islamic perspective, it is a political / religious conflict, given that Islam has fused both aspects since its early beginnings, as mentioned earlier. This theory is supported by the fact that Eastern Christianity has suffered as a result of foreign attacks in the course of the long historical conflict with political Islam. The crusaders have played a role in weakening Eastern Christianity, and what the crusades did in Constantinople is proof enough. Furthermore, the Eastern Christians have paid – and are still paying – a heavy price, given the intense religious tone of the conflict. As perceived by political Islam, there was no way for Eastern Christians to escape unscathed, and they have become convenient targets of the hostility and rage permeating their world.

The Fifth Round: Political Islam took a turn in initiating another round, and the events of 9/11 marked the beginning of a deliberately planned round of assaults. The only difference this time around is that rather than a “Muslim Caliphate” state to carry out the assault, “Global Islamism” took that job. As mentioned earlier, “Global Islamism” is a comprehensive concept, and terrorism – planned or unplanned – represents the aggressive wing of this wide-ranging scheme. In the days of the Muslim Caliphate, there was a central state in charge of the military aspects of political Islam, and nowadays, in the absence of that state, terrorism has taken on the military role (of course, the concept of Global Islamism extends far beyond mere terrorism).

There are no designated leadership quarters for Global Islamism, but there are several quarters for the purposes of recruitment and spreading the word, and Saudi Arabia comes on top of those, followed by Egypt and Pakistan. Around the globe, millions of Muslims are sitting on the sidelines, watching the unfolding events from a distance, as this round of assaults was initiated by extremists only and not by all Muslims. Some in the West have estimated those extremists to represent around 10-15% of the total population of the Muslim world, which roughly equals 130-200 million fanatics. Islamic extremism is unfortunately gaining more ground as days go by, a fact that does not bode well for the future, hinting at the possibility of an extensive confrontation and of a shift from a cold war status to a an all-out battle.

Conspicuously, the cycles of violence instigated by political Islam – whether through the Muslim Caliphate, the Ottoman Caliphate or international terrorism – are of a global nature, hitting East and West, sparing no one, while the western attacks mostly tend to target the East and the countries of the Third World.

So, which of the Muslim states can stake a claim for the leadership of the Muslim world?

There are three types of leadership:
First, political and military leadership: it is obvious that none of the Muslim states qualify for this type of leadership, for many reasons. It is also a given that the West would not allow such a state to emerge and bring back the Muslim Caliphate; the West has no wish to revisit that period, or to be haunted once more by the phantoms of the Islamic invasions that have threatened Europe more than once.

Second: an intellectual leadership capable of offering a compelling extremist ideology that would draw and mobilize fanatics. Several states are walking that path, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran and Pakistan are at the top of that list.

Third: The model of Islamic reform: simply put, this implies following the example of Judaism and Christianity in making a complete separation between religion and state. So far, not a single state has dared to put this model forth, as the great majority firmly believes in an Islam that fuses “religion and state”. The Turkish model is an exceptional case, that can neither be generalized nor copied, not to mention that it has been gradually losing ground, and showing clear signs of instability and turmoil.


Possible Future Scenarios

The First Scenario: suggested by Bernard Lewis – a historian and prominent expert on the Ottoman Caliphate– in a book that was written prior to the events of 9/11, and published afterwards. In the book entitled What Went Wrong? he mentioned that the Muslim civilization has declined, and the Muslim world was crumbling under the weight of ignorance, poverty and regression. “Islam cannot (“cannot” is one word) flourish without conquests”, he clearly stated, which means that a substantial Muslim political structure cannot exist in the absence of Muslim Caliphate.

The Second Scenario: A resurgence of a Muslim Caliphate, in a different form, the dream that Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri have long harbored, and thought to accomplish through terrorism, and by taking control over a state that will serve as a launching point for the new Muslim Caliphate. They were hoping to start with Afghanistan, then move on to Saudi Arabia, overthrow the regime, and establish a base for the Caliphate, but their dream faded after Afghanistan was hit. Prior to that, Hassan Al-Turabi, who was based in Sudan, tried and failed to revive the Islamic Nationalism “al-Umamiah al-Islamiya”. Others took a step-by-step approach to revive the Muslim Caliphate, resorting first to political means, and planning to shift into a military mode once they are in power. The Muslim Brotherhood movement in Egypt stands out as passionate advocates of that approach, as confirmed by a statement of the late supreme guide of the movement – Mr. Mustafa Mashour “we will not give up (the goal) of restoring the Muslim Caliphate”. (Asharq Al-Awsat, 9 Aug. 2002). I personally think that these attempts are destined to fail.

The Third Scenario: suggested by Samuel Huntington in “The Clash of Civilizations”, where he wrote “in the end, Mohammed will triumph” – meaning that the Prophet of Islam will have his victory owing to the Muslim world’s rapid population growth, and the way Islam is spreading and the Muslim cells are multiplying, threatening to enfold the world within their clasp.

The Fourth Scenario: it was suggested in the aftermath of the events of 9/11 that this is the final round of the battle between political Islam and the West, which will result in “the collapse of the Muslim World.” This scenario suggests that political Islam will be entirely defeated in a matter of a few decades, because terrorism will have taken the lead in this round, at a time when the Muslim world was at its weakest. That might explain why some people have commented that the Muslim world is actually facing the most dangerous crisis in its long history.

Magdi Khalil is a political analyst, researcher, author and executive editor of the Egyptian weekly Watani International. He is also a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper, London, a free-lance writer for several Arabic language newspapers, and a frequent contributor to Middle East broadcast news TV. Mr. Khalil has also published three books and written numerous research papers on citizenship rights, civil society, and the situation of minorities in the Middle East. E-mail: magdikh@hotmail.com

Sold! Voltaire's Letters to Catherine the Great

At auction, for $750,000, at Sotheby's Russian Sale in London. Report from the BBC:

The figure is a world record for handwritten correspondence from this period, said Sotheby's auction house. The 26 letters date from 1768-1777, when Catherine was ruler of Russia and Voltaire lived in Switzerland.

Some of the letters are signed "the old hermit" while in others the philosopher simply refers to himself as "V". Catherine II, also known as Catherine the Great, was a German-born Empress who ruled Russia from 1762-96.

She described herself as a "philosopher on the throne" and corresponded with several prominent European thinkers throughout her reign. The letters from Voltaire discuss her foreign policy, including the partition of Poland and her first war with the Ottoman Empire in 1768-74.

The Ottoman ruler, Mustafa III, comes in for ridicule throughout the correspondence, with Voltaire referring to him as "fat and ignorant".

The Haditha Massacre

Congressman Murtha was right to make an issue of this. The problem is not the crime--massacres happen in every war--but the coverup. The more quickly this is handled by a court-martial and the guilty punished, the better--because it would demonstrate that massacre is not US policy. US Marines are not professional baby killers, nor should they be, IMHO.

BTW, this might be a serious enough issue to force Rumsfeld's long-overdo resignation, if anyone has the nerve to take him on. How much worse can the image of America get? And it's been on his watch...

East Timor Crisis News Roundup

From the BBC. Interesting angle from the Sydney Telegraph:

The kumbaya crowd which pressed for East Timor's independence must shoulder much of the blame for the failure of its dysfunctional government. The fact Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri... is deeply unpopular with much of East Timor's population is largely overlooked by his left-wing sympathisers. Nor is it apparent that any of those who clamoured for East Timor's independence lodged objections to the appointment of Interior Minister Rogerio Lobato, with responsibility for the novice nation's police, though he was trained by Cambodia's notorious Khmer Rouge regime.

Pssst! The Taliban Are Back...

I don't know if I said anything about it here at the time, but the American decision to bring the Taliban and Islamist extremists into the Afghan government seems to have been a mistake. I remember thinking early on they'd play an inside/outside game to recapture as much power as possible, if given a chance(wouldn't you?). Completely crushing them, driving all of them into exile if necessary, seemed a better option than co-optation. And unfortunately it looks like the Taliban are doing just what was expected of them, taking advantage of American weakness and the proffered hand of friendship to stick it to the Yankees and call for "Death to America!" (Hint to President Bush: people who say things like that cannot be our friends, and those who fight them ought not to be our enemies). From The Guardian:

While Iraq continues to dominate the headlines, an upsurge of fighting in southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban drew its traditional support, is worrying western politicians.

Today saw riots break out in Kabul after a fatal accident involving a US convoy. Protesters shouted slogans against Harmid Karzai, the Afghan president, and the US, and the unrest left at least seven people dead and 40 injured.

Meanwhile in the south, around 50 people, reported to be Taliban fighters and leaders were killed in a US air raid - some reports say on a mosque - after they attacked a convoy.

The latest casualties bring the number of deaths in Afghanistan to over 370 in recent in the last two weeks - comparable to the number of deaths in Iraq over the same period - in some of the heaviest fighting since the fall of the Taliban after the September 11 2001 attacks on the US.

Reports in the Pakistani press say several southern provinces including Uruzgan, Kandahar and Helmand - where 3,300 British troops are being deployed - are slipping out of control as the Taliban have taken the fight to western forces.

US and Nato forces have responded in kind, resulting in the rising level of casualties.

The Taliban's goal is that of any guerrilla force - to convey the impression that the central government and its backers cannot protect the local populace, so chipping away at its authority and credibility.

Now the warm weather has arrived in Afghanistan, western forces will have to endure more attacks from a reinvigorated and emboldened Taliban.

Who Lost Turkey?

Philip H. Gordon and Omer Taspinar of the Brookings Institution believe Turkey is the brink of becoming anti-American, because of Iraq:

The United States and Europe should be paying close attention to what is going on in Turkey today. Turkey's relationship with the United States is under great strain. Turks deeply resent the effect that the war in Iraq has had on their own Kurdish separatism problem. Turkey's long-standing fear that independence-minded Kurdish nationalists would dominate northern Iraq, thereby setting a dangerous precedent for Kurds in Turkey, has since become reality. The Kurdish population of Turkey is about 15 million, 3 to 4 times more than Iraq's Kurdish minority. Despite U.S. government protestations to the contrary, most Turks believe that a civil war in Iraq will be followed by the creation of a de facto if not de jure independent Kurdistan. In that sense, the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the ensuing disorder in the country threaten 50 years of U.S.-Turkish strategic partnership.

Apple Loses to 13-year-old Blogger

What was Apple thinking?

A Russian-Turkish-Israeli Alliance?

Axis Globe says high-level discussions are underway right now. Personally, I think it might be possible --since the US seems to be losing control of Iraq and Afghanistan, and all three have reason to fight Islamist extremists:

Meanwhile, Washington is watching with alarm the formation of the new Moscow-Ankara-Tel-Aviv energy triangle. Here one may realize more clearly that the the Baku-Ceyhan project undertaken by the American initiative is becoming the lever of influence of Moscow in the region.

Active contacts of the Israeli side with the Russian gas company "Gazprom” do not add optimism to the Americans. It is supposed that the Russian gas would flow to Israel by the underwater "Blue Stream" pipeline that will be prolonged from the Turkish Black Sea port Samsun up to the Mediterranean terminal Ceyhan and therefrom – to Lebanon and to Israel – by the Turkish state gas company Botas and "Gazprom". According to the American source in Bruxelles, the US Department of State has already informed the Israeli diplomats of their concern regarding the development of a situation, undesirable from its point of view.

I would hope that the US, rather than oppose this alliance, bless it and work with the three powers as a full partner to end this Global War on Terrorism quickly and decisively, dropping American unilateralism and instead demanding a WWII-style "unconditional surrender" from the Islamists and their supporters. Instead of a token "coaltion of the willing," we might actually be able to have some real allies.

Wanderlustress Reports On Sudan

Here.

The History of Memorial Day

From The History Channel:

Today, Memorial Day is celebrated at Arlington National Cemetery with a ceremony in which a small American flag is placed on each grave. Also, it is customary for the president or vice-president to give a speech honoring the contributions of the dead and lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. About 5,000 people attend the ceremony annually.

Andrew Bostom on Islamic Jihad

The author of The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims will be on C-Span's Book TV this Sunday at 4:30 AM, according to The American Thinker blurb--Insomniacs of the world, unite...

Madeleine Bunting: Let Turkey Join EU

She writes in The Guardian:

The application to the EU is characterised by two ironies, neither of which is lost on Turks. Firstly, although Turkey pioneered secularism in the Muslim world, discussion in the EU of Turkey's application to join has focused on its 97% Muslim population. Secondly, although Turkey has finally resolved its decades-old identity crisis as to whether it is European or Asian - the majorities in favour of EU accession are substantial - Europe has now plunged into an identity crisis.

Much of the opposition to Turkish EU membership pivots on these ironies and the questions they prompt: is Europe a geographical or a cultural entity, and how do you define the boundaries of either? Nilufer Gole, a Turkish academic working in France, warns of the grave dangers of a narcissistic European Union obsessed by these questions of identity rather than motivated by the sense of project (initially, Franco-German peace) that gave birth to the EU and has sustained it. It's the project - of peace, of economic growth, of democracy and human rights - that appeals to Turkey, not indeterminate questions of identity.

An EU project that carved out a distinctive European engagement with Islam in which Turkey was a key partner would trounce Samuel Huntingdon's specious and self-fulfilling theory of a "clash of civilisations". Naked self-interest - those pipelines and pensions - will help drive this project forward. But I'm aware that many would attribute my enthusiasm to that intoxicating Istanbul effect of a city prickling with minarets above a sparkling blue sea.

Indonesian Earthquake Kills Thousands

Here's the seismic record from the US Geological Survey:

Tony Blair Comes to Washington

He's trying to help Bush, I think. But it may be too late. He's certainly not trying to help himself politically, given the low esteem Britons hold for Bush. Oh, I guess they may also be talking about bombing Iran, withdrawing from Iraq, and preparing for the G8 summit in Russia, a few little international items like that...

Alistair Cooke's New Book

Published posthumously after a 60-plus year delay, edited by Sir Harold Evans (Mr. Tina Brown), reviewed Wednesday by William Grimes in the New York Times, former Omnibus and Masterpiece Theatre host Alistair Cooke's The American Home Front: America 1941-1942 sounds like a jolly good summer read:

Mr. Cooke sees the things only a foreigner would. He grasps the unique qualities of the drug store, which he calls "the image of a complete American community — a shining fountain, the taste of lush syrups, an orgy of casual friendships and smart advertising, a halfway house between brisk comings and goings, the wayside first-aid station of American cleanliness and quick health." He has a sensitive ear for the casual cruelties of racism, and in California makes a detour to an internment camp for Japanese-Americans, which he reports on, sorrowfully and humanely, at time when most Americans could not have cared less.

Much of the reporting is upbeat. Factories are going full blast, everyone has a job, and airplanes, tanks and Jeeps are rolling off the assembly lines. Even amber waves of grain, "the American factory of winter wheat," seem to be part of the vast American war machine. The mood, in many ways, is bright.

Direct questions about the war elicit somber responses. "But walk right into his cornfield," Mr. Cooke writes of the average Kansas farmer, "exchange the time of day, admire a stallion, and ask him how's business and he will grin, wipe his forehead, and say that the last two years have been fine, and if the war keeps on, the next two years will be better."

Whether he was at a film studio in Los Angeles or a cattle ranch in Wyoming, Mr. Cooke always managed to ask that second question. While the rest of the journalistic pack nibbled at news releases back in Washington, he followed his instincts and took a good look around the rest of the country. He filed late, but boy, did he get it right.

Enron Verdict: Guilty

The Bradley Prize Winners Are...

I saw a small ad in the Washington Post today, but it didn't say how much. At $250,000 each, it seems worth mentioning. I read Hernando deSoto's books on the mystery of capital, and they were very interesting. And I also took a class from Fouad Ajami, and he certainly deserves every penny...But for some strange reason the Bradley foundation seems more excited about singer Della Reese (in the headline and the lede) than their own winners (merely mentioned in the second graf). Anyway, here's the press release for what seems to be the conservative foundation world's answer to the McArthur "genius" awards.:

Milwaukee, WI—The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation today announced world renowned singer and actress Della Reese will perform at the third annual Bradley Prizes ceremony being held at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, May 25, 2006.

The 2006 Bradley Prizes honor Dr. Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies; Clint Bolick of the Alliance for School Choice; Hernando de Soto of the Institute for Liberty and Democracy and Shelby Steele of the Hoover Institution. Each recipient will receive a stipend of $250,000.

“We are pleased and proud that Della Reese will perform at the 2006 Bradley Prizes ceremony,” said Michael W. Grebe, President and CEO of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation. “Della Reese will add her voice and remarkable presence to what will be an exciting event.”

Bush Names New Domestic Policy Chief

Karl Zinsmeister, editor of The American Enterprise magazine, published by AEI. An excerpt from the NY Sun report:

Mr. Zinsmeister, who declined to be interviewed yesterday, is an unusual choice for a top White House job. While he has ties through the magazine to many leading intellectuals, his only government employment was a stint more than two decades ago as a legislative assistant to Senator Moynihan.

Mr. Zinsmeister edited the American Enterprise Institute's magazine from upstate Cazenovia [in NY state] and was rarely seen at the conservative think tank's offices in Washington.

In an e-mail to friends and colleagues yesterday, Mr. Zinsmeister signaled he will try to maintain an outsider's perspective on Washington, even as he takes up his West Wing post. He said he and his family plan to live in Baltimore, some 40 miles away.

Mr. Zinsmeister said he and Mr. Bush formed a quick bond, leading to the job offer. "After hitting it off with him and his new staff, I have accepted," the editor wrote...

...Some of the recent staffing changes have been seen as aimed at assuaging complaints about the White House from lawmakers, journalists, and other Washington insiders. However, if Mr. Bush was seeking to smooth ruffled feathers in the capital, Mr. Zinsmeister would not appear to be the right choice.

In a 2004 interview with the Syracuse New Times, the future White House aide declared, "People in Washington are morally repugnant, cheating, shifty human beings. The mom who charters a bus for her kids to go to a rave is as bad as the lady with the crackpipe. We have sickness at the top and bottom of our society and we have a big middle, sensible with common sense and decency and morality."

Just as with Mr. Snow, some of Mr. Zinsmeister's writings could cause embarrassment to the White House. He has engaged in some mild criticism of Mr. Bush's budget policies. In a recent issue of the American Enterprise, Mr. Zinsmeister wrote, "Though he talks a good line about battling government bloat, our current president has shown an eerie lackawanna when it comes to actually keeping a lid on the federal Pandora's box."

Mr. Zinsmeister has also written candidly on race, arguing that black communities have developed crippling problems that overlap in a way unseen in other parts of America. "The point of the conservative concern over black underclass life is that the pathologies run so much deeper there," he wrote in 1996, citing his mentor Moynihan. "We desperately need to find out what it is in contemporary black culture that makes for these exceptional breakdowns."

Stamp Honors Hiram Bingham, WWII Rescuer

A story in today's Washington Post about this new stamp caught our eye. Hiram Bingham IV worked with Varian Fry's Emergency Rescue Committee to save prominent intellectuals from Hitler. I interviewed Albert O. Hirschmann, who worked on the effort (in part sponsored by Eleanor Roosevelt), for my film "Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die?" and I met some of Bingham's descendants at a "Visas for Life" reception at the State Department in 2003.

Bingham resigned from the State Department in protest in 1946. He was awarded a "constructive dissent" award by Secretary of State Colin Powell in 2002. For more information, here's a link to Kim Bingham's tribute website. Here's a quote from the website:

HARRY'S OWN WORDS in taped interview by his 13 year old grandaughter Tiffany Bingham (circa 1980): "We were transferred in 1937 to Marseille in France where there were a great many refugees from Nazi Germany trying to get visas to get to the United States and part of my work was giving visas to these refugees....They (the Germans – ed) had a lot of what was called the Fifth Column, which were sort of spies and people living in southern France. And we got rumors that the Germans were going to come down to southern France and would be there any time... Although we were not in the war, most of our government was on the side of the allies, the British and the French. But my boss who was the Consul General at that time, said, “The Germans are going to win the war. Why should we do anything to offend them?” And he didn't want to give any visas to these Jewish people. So...I had to do as much as I could.... The Germans had signed an agreement with the French that they could stay in that zone, but they must surrender any Germans that were there -- any refugees -- on demand, and they would then be sent back to concentration camps in Germany. TIFFANY: What was the most important thing that you did for the Jews? HIRAM: Well, in a way, it was getting as many visas as I could to as many people….And we did help them." Grandaughter Tiffany taped interview with Harry for Salem School class project, circa 1980.

And here's a photo from the website of the line in front of the US Consulate in Marseilles in 1940.

Richard Pipes Criticizes Bush Administration's Russia Policy

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty interviews America's leading expert on Russia, who criticizes Bush administration handling of the upcoming G8 summit (ht Johnson's Russia List):

RFE/RL: And what about American-Russian relations? Are you satisfied with the present position of the U.S. administration?

Pipes: I am somewhat critical of the way the administration handles Russia now. I think it's not up to the American government -- I mean, particularly somebody as influential as Vice President [Richard Cheney] -- to criticize the restrictions on democracy in Russia. I think that is kind of meddling in the internal affairs of another country. But I think it would be appropriate for someone lower down and perhaps for institutions such as the Council on Foreign Relations and so on to do it -- and they are doing it, criticizing it. But the president and the vice president and the secretary of state and so on, I think, should conduct a more even-handed policy and not criticize the political developments in Russia. It bothers me when that's done. Russians are extremely sensitive to any kind of criticism, and that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticize them, but one should be very careful about what one says about what's going on in Russia.

The Russian people, I think, would want Putin to continue, which gives him a strong stimulus to run again.... The Duma, I think, is prepared to vote him powers, or to make an amendment to the constitution to enable him to rule again -- but we will just have to wait and see.

RFE/RL: What about the upcoming G-8 conference in Russia? Don't you think that U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's recent remarks were somehow connected with the preparation of this event?

Pipes: Well, they may have been. I don't know what was on their minds. I mean, the attitude in America now is very critical. We have, the Council on Foreign Relations, just published a report on Russia which is very, very negative. But it seems to me, you know, once you have accepted Russia into the G-8, once you go there, then good manners require that you tone down, mute your criticism. It's just a question of manners more than anything else. And Russians, I'd say, are very sensitive -- often unjustly so -- to criticism. They think it's a sign of hostility. Very often, it's a sign of friendship when you tell people, "You know, you are doing this wrong. It's not that I'm your enemy, I'm your friend, I would like you to do the right thing." But they find this very difficult to conceive. So, I would say, I hope that when the meeting takes place, that the criticism will be muted.