After a quarter-century of willful blindness, it was at least a start. We should note, moreover, that it’s a start we owe to the president-elect. Washington, meaning both parties, had erected such barriers to a rational public discussion of our enemies that breaking through took Trump’s outsized persona, in all its abrasive turns and its excesses. Comparative anonymities (looking down at my shoes, now) could try terrorism cases and fill shelves with books and pamphlets and columns on the ideology behind the jihad from now until the end of time. But no matter how many terrorist attacks Americans endured, the public examination of the enemy was not going to happen unless a credible candidate for the world’s most important job dramatically shifted the parameters of acceptable discourse.
What we Cassandras have really been trying to highlight is a simple fact, as patent as it was unremarkable from the time of Sun Tsu until the 1993 World Trade Center bombing: To defeat the enemy, you must know the enemy — who he is, what motivates him, what he is trying to achieve. Being willing to name the enemy is a start. But it is just a start — the beginning, not the end, of understanding.
In his major campaign speech on the subject, Trump asserted that the enemy is “radical Islamic terrorism.” Terrorism, surely, is the business end of the spear, but “radical Islamic terrorism” is an incomplete portrait. Dangerously incomplete? That depends on whether the term (a) is Trump’s shorthand for a threat he realizes is significantly broader than terrorism, or (b) reflects his actual — and thus insufficient — grasp of the challenge.
Trump intimated some understanding of this, too. He vowed to “speak out against the oppression of women, gays, and people of different faith [i.e., non-Muslims].” He promised, in addition, to work with “all moderate Muslim reformers in the Middle East.” The objects of radical Islamic oppression are targeted because of ideological tenets that call for dominion by sharia, Islam’s ancient totalitarian law. It is those tenets that reformers are trying to reform.
If ISIS and al-Qaeda disappeared tomorrow, other jihadist networks would take their places. It will be that way until sharia supremacism is discredited and marginalized.
That is a tall order, not to be underestimated. The audience in which the ideology must be discredited is not Western; it does not share our value system — our sense of what is credible and meritorious. Plus, the sharia that our enemies strive to implement (i.e., “jihad in Allah’s way”) is undeniably rooted in Islamic scripture. It will not be easy — it may not be possible — to discredit a literalist construction of Islam that has been backed by revered scholars for 14 centuries.
There is, furthermore, an on-the-ground reality of much greater moment than theological infighting: A large percentage of the world’s approximately 1.6 billion Muslims reject sharia supremacism. Many of them provide us with essential help in fighting the enemy. To condemn Islam, rather than those who seek to impose Islam’s ruling system on us, can only alienate our allies. They are allies we need in an ideological conflict.
The sensible strategy, therefore, calls for supporting the Islamic reformers President-elect Trump says he wants to befriend. That would be an epic improvement over outreach to Islamists, whom our government has inanely courted and empowered for a quarter-century. To the extent we can (and that may be limited), we should support the reinterpretation of what Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi courageously acknowledged as “the corpus of texts and ideas that we [Muslims] have sacralized over the centuries, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible” even though they are “antagonizing the entire world.”
Sisi, it is worth noting, is a devout Muslim who knows a lot more about Islam than Barack Obama and John Kerry do. In any event, it’s better to confront with open eyes the scripturally rooted ideological foundation of radical Islam. As we’ve seen over the last three presidential administrations (or the last six, if you want to go back to Carter and Khomeini’s revolution), pretending that the ideology does not exist, or that it represents a “false Islam,” is fantasy. As a national-security strategy, fantasy is a prescription for failure.
It has been the Obama prescription, right up to the end.
While candidate Trump was demanding that the enemy be named, and me-too Hillary was thus goaded into the occasional mention of “jihadists,” Obama tried to defend his refusal to invoke radical Islam. The defense was classic Obama. Part One was flat wrong: “There’s no religious rationale ,” he maintained, that would justify” the “barbarism” in which terrorists engage — something that could only be right if we ignore scripture and adopt Obama’s eccentric notion of “religious rationale.” Part Two drew on Obama’s bottomless supply of straw men: “ Using the phrase ‘radical Islam ,’” he lectured, will not make the terrorist threat “go away” — as if anyone had claimed it would.
The point, of course, is not that there is talismanic power in uttering an enemy’s identity. It is to convey, to the enemy and to an anxious American public, that our leader comprehends who the enemy is, what the enemy’s objectives are, and what drives the enemy to achieve them.
Obviously, Obama is too smart not to know this. After eight infuriating years, I am beyond trying to fathom whether his intentional gibberish masks some misguided but well-meaning strategy, some dogma to which he is hopelessly beholden, or something more sinister. The imperative now is to address the mess he is leaving behind, not unwind how and why he came to make it.
What does this have to do with our enemy’s ideology? Everything.
Further, radical Islam regards the presence of a sovereign Jewish state in Islamic territory as an intolerable affront. Again, the reason is doctrinal. Do not take my word for it; have a look at the 1988 Hamas Charter (“The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement”). Article 7, in particular, includes this statement by the prophet Muhammad:
The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say, “O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.” . . . (Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim).
Understand: Al-Bukhari and Muslim are authoritative collections of hadith. These memorializations of the prophet’s sayings and deeds have scriptural status in Islam. Hamas is not lying — this story of an end-of-times annihilation of Jews is related, repeatedly, in Islamic scripture. (See, e.g., here .) And please spare me the twaddle about how there are competing interpretations that discount or “contextualize” these hadith. It doesn’t matter which, if any, interpretation represents the “true Islam” (if there is one). What matters for purposes of our security is that millions of Muslims, including our enemies, believe these hadith mean what they say — unalterable, for all time.
Even after all the mass-murder attacks we have endured over the last few decades, and for all their claptrap about respecting Islam as “one of the world’s great religions,” transnational progressives cannot bring themselves to accept that something as passé as religious doctrine could dictate 21st-century conflicts. So, they tell themselves, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict is simply about territorial boundaries and refugee rights. It could be settled if Israel, which they reckon would never have been established but for a regrettable bout of post-Holocaust remorse, would just make a few concessions regarding land it was never ceded in the first place (conveniently overlooking that East Jerusalem and the West Bank are disputed territories, and were not “Palestinian” when Israel took them in the 1967 war of Arab aggression).
It is not just fantasy but willfully blind idiocy. No one who took a few minutes to understand the ideology of radical Islam would contemplate for a moment a resolution such as the one Obama just choreographed.
We are not merely in a shooting war with jihadists. We are in an ideological war with sharia supremacists. Mass murder is not their sole tactic; they attack at the negotiating table, in the councils of government, in the media, on the campus, in the courtroom — at every political and cultural pressure point. To defeat jihadists, it is necessary to discredit the ideology that catalyzes them. You don’t discredit an ideology by ignoring its existence, denying its power, and accommodating it at every turn.
President Obama never got this. Will President Trump?
In his campaign, Trump made a welcome start by naming the enemy. Now it is time to know the enemy — such that it is clear to the enemy that we understand his objectives and his motivation, and that we will deny him because our own principles require it.
That would tell radical Islam that America rejects its objectives as well as its tactics, that we will fight its ideology as well as its terrorism. This is not just about restoring our reputation as a dependable ally. Our security depends on it.
© Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443440/donald-trump-radical-islam-israel-palestinian-conflict-test-case-new-administration
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.
As a freely accessible resource for the region, East Asia Forum relies on donations from those who believe in its importance. More information. 
The P-3CK four-engine anti-submarine and maritime surveillance plane dropped three Harpoon missiles, a torpedo, and depth charges into the sea, Yonhap news agency reported, citing the South Korean military. 
TOKYO — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un hinted Sunday that Pyongyang may ring in the new year with another bang — the test-launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile. 
過激派組織ＩＳ＝イスラミックステートは、イラクとシリアで支配地域を大きく失うなど弱体化が進んでいますが、依然高い戦闘能力を維持していて、さらなる弱体化に向けて、各国が連携して資金や戦闘員の動きをいかに断つかが鍵を握っています。 イラクとシリアの過激派組織ＩＳの拠点に対しては、アメリカ主導の有志連合による空爆に加え、イラク軍やトルコ軍、クルド人部隊などの地上部隊が攻撃を続け、ＩＳの支配地域はおととし１月に比べ３分の１程度まで縮小しています。 ＩＳを離反する戦闘員も増えているもようで、シリア人の元戦闘員はＮＨＫの取材に対し、「住民がＩＳの戦闘員を襲うようになり、戦闘員は隠れて逃げ回っている」としてシリア国内の一部地域では、戦闘員の士気が低下するなど、ＩＳの弱体化が進んでいると証言しました。 一方でＩＳは先月、シリア中部で一度は撤退した世界遺産都市パルミラに戦闘員を集結させて再び制圧するなど、依然高い戦闘能力を維持しています。 またＩＳは、過激な思想に共鳴する若者らに資金を提供するなどしてヨーロッパなど各地でテロを計画していると言われ、大きな脅威となっています。こうしたことから、ＩＳのさらなる弱体化に向けて、各国が連携して資金や戦闘員の動きをいかに断つかが鍵を握っています。
昨年、お笑い界で最も輝いたコンビは、１２月４日にＭ―１グランプリ２０１６の王者に輝いた銀シャリだった。鰻（うなぎ）和弘（３３）と橋本直（３６）は、２０１７年を「漫才の手を休めることなく、漫才師として厚みを増していきたい」と意気込む。 Ｍ―１王者は、８度目の挑戦で手にした称号だ。１５年には２位に終わり、「それまで『Ｍ―１とる！』とは言ってたけれど、どこか夢物語みたいな思いもあった。でも、２位になってからは本気のスイッチが入った」と橋本。１６年は、テレビ番組の収録の合間にも２人で練習を重ねた「リベンジの１年」だった。 上方漫才大賞奨励賞のほか、ルミネｔｈｅよしもとでの若手賞レースでも優勝。橋本は「絶対いける年や。この流れでＭ―１も」と念じ、実現させた。 一方、１５年に結婚し、１６年…
写真特集：エチオピアの聖地を旅する 
日銀 は30日、家計や企業、金融機関の金庫などで年を越すお札（日銀券）が102兆4612億円になったと発表した。年越しのお札が100兆円を超えるのは初めて。もともと年末は初売りやお年玉などの現金需要が高く、出回るお札が増える。加えて銀行預金の金利低下で、タンス預金が増えている面もある。 
１日午前７時５０分ごろ、埼玉県秩父市大滝の登山道で、男性登山者が滑落したと同行者（３７）から１１０番があった。県警山岳救助隊が約２時間半後、登山道から約２００メートル下で、登山者と、救助に向かった別の男性の計２人が倒れているのを発見。２人は搬送先の病院で死亡が確認された。滑落死したとみられる。 
London (dpa) — Gary Anderson steht unmittelbar vor dem Titel-Hattrick als Darts-Weltmeister. Der 46 Jahre alte Schotte gewann sein Halbfinale gegen Landsmann Peter Wright klar mit 6:3 und steht damit zum dritten Mal in Serie im Endspiel um die begehrte Sid-Waddell-Trophy. 
