Norman Podhoretz: World War IV (Interview)
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Norman Podhoretz, the editor at large for Commentary magazine, of which he was editor in chief for thirty-five years. He is also an adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute and the author of numerous bestselling books, including Making It, Breaking Ranks, Ex-Friends, My Love Affair with America, and The Prophets. He is the author of the new book World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.
FP: Norman Podhoretz, welcome to Frontpage Interview. It is a privilege and an honor to have you with us.
Podhoretz: Thanks very much.
FP: What inspired you to write this book?
Podhoretz: First of all, so far as I could tell, there was no other book out there that made a serious effort to set 9/11, the battles that followed it in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the war of ideas it has provoked at home into a broad historical context. This is what I set out to do. Secondly, I thought the time had come for a full-throated, whole-hearted statement of the case for the Bush Doctrine. By doing this, I hoped to remind the former supporters of the Bush Doctrine who had been losing heart of how World War IV started, what the stakes are, and why we have to win.
FP: Why do you use the term “Islamofascism” to describe our enemy in this war?
Podhoretz: The term Islamofascism is as precise a characterization as I could find of the religio-political totalitarian force that we are up against. Terrorism in itself is not the enemy; it is the enemy's weapon of choice.
FP: There was a denial occurring throughout the 1990s. What was that denial and how did it hurt us?
Podhoretz: The denial that war had been declared on us by the Islamofascists goes back to the 1970's and ended only on 9/11. In my book I list a long series of terrorist attacks on American facilities all over the world that should have been recognized as acts of war demanding a military response but that were treated, by Republican and Democratic administrations alike, as random criminal acts to be handled by the cops and the courts. John Kerry still calls such attacks "nuisances" with which we can live, as we do with gambling and prostitution. The damage this attitude did was to embolden Osama bin Laden and his allies and sponsors, who decided that the US was a paper tiger that could be attacked with impunity. It seems clear that he never expected us to fight back as we did in response to 9/11.
FP: Briefly give us your defense of the Bush Doctrine.
Podhoretz: The Bush Doctrine, to simplify, sets forth a two-pronged strategy, one military and the other political, designed to confront the new kind of threat we are now facing. The military component is preemption (because, as the President has said, "if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long") and the political component is democratization (to "drain the swamps" in which Islamofascist terrorism breeds). What I try to show in my book is that there is no other viable way to victory over Islamofascism.
FP: One of your chapters is titled “The Radicalization of the Democrats.” To be sure, it means something when, as you point out, Michael Moore sits in Jimmy Carter’s box at the Democratic National Convention. (p.168)
So how and why exactly have the Democrats been radicalized? What are the key consequences?
Podhoretz: Partly for partisan political reasons and partly out of the post-Vietnam attitudes that many Democrats still harbor, they have once again been taken over by the left wing of the party, just as they were in 1972, when they nominated George McGovern. We won't know the full consequences until the results of the next presidential election. Meanwhile the Democrats have succeeded in pushing the debate over Iraq to the sorry point where the only question is how soon we can withdraw and whether to set a timetable.
FP: You leave a little bit of optimism open that perhaps a course may be set for the reform and modernization of Islam. (p.215) Can you talk a little bit about that?
Podhoretz: I believe that clearing the ground and sowing the seeds out of which new political, social, and economic conditions can grow is likely to give rise to pressures from within for religious reform. Muslim religious leaders will be faced with the demand that ways be found in the sharia that would make it possible to be a good Muslim while at the same time enjoying the blessings of decent government and even of political and economic liberty.
FP: Who will your book upset?
Podhoretz: The Left, the paleoconservative Right, and both the liberals and the conservatives (including some neoconservatives) who once supported the war but have now lost heart.
FP: Norman Podhoretz, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. It was a pleasure to speak with you.
Podhoretz: Thanks very much for inviting me.
Read entire article at Jamie Glazov at frontpagemag.com
FP: Norman Podhoretz, welcome to Frontpage Interview. It is a privilege and an honor to have you with us.
Podhoretz: Thanks very much.
FP: What inspired you to write this book?
Podhoretz: First of all, so far as I could tell, there was no other book out there that made a serious effort to set 9/11, the battles that followed it in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the war of ideas it has provoked at home into a broad historical context. This is what I set out to do. Secondly, I thought the time had come for a full-throated, whole-hearted statement of the case for the Bush Doctrine. By doing this, I hoped to remind the former supporters of the Bush Doctrine who had been losing heart of how World War IV started, what the stakes are, and why we have to win.
FP: Why do you use the term “Islamofascism” to describe our enemy in this war?
Podhoretz: The term Islamofascism is as precise a characterization as I could find of the religio-political totalitarian force that we are up against. Terrorism in itself is not the enemy; it is the enemy's weapon of choice.
FP: There was a denial occurring throughout the 1990s. What was that denial and how did it hurt us?
Podhoretz: The denial that war had been declared on us by the Islamofascists goes back to the 1970's and ended only on 9/11. In my book I list a long series of terrorist attacks on American facilities all over the world that should have been recognized as acts of war demanding a military response but that were treated, by Republican and Democratic administrations alike, as random criminal acts to be handled by the cops and the courts. John Kerry still calls such attacks "nuisances" with which we can live, as we do with gambling and prostitution. The damage this attitude did was to embolden Osama bin Laden and his allies and sponsors, who decided that the US was a paper tiger that could be attacked with impunity. It seems clear that he never expected us to fight back as we did in response to 9/11.
FP: Briefly give us your defense of the Bush Doctrine.
Podhoretz: The Bush Doctrine, to simplify, sets forth a two-pronged strategy, one military and the other political, designed to confront the new kind of threat we are now facing. The military component is preemption (because, as the President has said, "if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long") and the political component is democratization (to "drain the swamps" in which Islamofascist terrorism breeds). What I try to show in my book is that there is no other viable way to victory over Islamofascism.
FP: One of your chapters is titled “The Radicalization of the Democrats.” To be sure, it means something when, as you point out, Michael Moore sits in Jimmy Carter’s box at the Democratic National Convention. (p.168)
So how and why exactly have the Democrats been radicalized? What are the key consequences?
Podhoretz: Partly for partisan political reasons and partly out of the post-Vietnam attitudes that many Democrats still harbor, they have once again been taken over by the left wing of the party, just as they were in 1972, when they nominated George McGovern. We won't know the full consequences until the results of the next presidential election. Meanwhile the Democrats have succeeded in pushing the debate over Iraq to the sorry point where the only question is how soon we can withdraw and whether to set a timetable.
FP: You leave a little bit of optimism open that perhaps a course may be set for the reform and modernization of Islam. (p.215) Can you talk a little bit about that?
Podhoretz: I believe that clearing the ground and sowing the seeds out of which new political, social, and economic conditions can grow is likely to give rise to pressures from within for religious reform. Muslim religious leaders will be faced with the demand that ways be found in the sharia that would make it possible to be a good Muslim while at the same time enjoying the blessings of decent government and even of political and economic liberty.
FP: Who will your book upset?
Podhoretz: The Left, the paleoconservative Right, and both the liberals and the conservatives (including some neoconservatives) who once supported the war but have now lost heart.
FP: Norman Podhoretz, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. It was a pleasure to speak with you.
Podhoretz: Thanks very much for inviting me.